Posted by pexetera on 6/7/2020 11:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by copernicus on 6/7/2020 11:04:00 AM (view original):
there were a couple useful Brad Daugherty seasons no one chose to use - clean, high efg, decent usage, meh boards and no defense to speak of but still - thoughts?

I kept waiting for Daugherty to get picked, especially by owners who drafted lower usage up front and needed some in the end. He has always performed very well for me when I've drafted him in the past despite his low defense. I had already drafted my usage / big men by the time he would have made my radar, but I thought he was a missed opportunity for some others. If I had known he was still going to be available all the way to the end, I might have not selected Enes Kanter in round 7 and taken Kevin Johnson at PG instead.

I was THIS close to picking Daugherty instead of Gasol. If Dirk was a better defender I might have.

just curious are all 5 leagues playing concurrently or consecutivly?

surely not consecutively, but maybe start times staggered a few days? are we trying to build a little suspense, or do I have to swallow the whole jagged little pill at once. of course, I plan to have the whole thing wrapped up by the 3rd league so the 5th final might be a little anticlimactic.

I've been thinking about that. I can see both ways. But in the end I think it's more in keeping with the spirit of the league to run them all at once. Staggering them would allow people to adjust for later leagues, not only in terms of coaching but by switching out for other player seasons if they want to. The concept of the league was to draft five teams at once, so I think we should play them all roughly at once.

Also to "delay" the start of the other leagues you would have to keep them from filling, because they'll start once they fill. That could result in the league accidentally not getting started if someone has an issue that takes them off WIS.

Finally, staggering the leagues could (unintentionally) give a slight advantage to people whose teams do the best in the earliest leagues, because by the time it gets to the second half of the season in later leagues, some folks are probably going to realize they're out of the running for the overall crown. Their waning interest would, in that scenario, potentially make the later leagues easier to rack up wins as some people mentally check out.

I do think it would be fun to have the playoffs sort of staggered across the five leagues, but in the end I think it's easier to manage, and more in keeping with the spirit of the league, to run them all at once.

Posted by tarheel1991 on 6/8/2020 11:34:00 AM (view original):
I've been thinking about that. I can see both ways. But in the end I think it's more in keeping with the spirit of the league to run them all at once. Staggering them would allow people to adjust for later leagues, not only in terms of coaching but by switching out for other player seasons if they want to. The concept of the league was to draft five teams at once, so I think we should play them all roughly at once.

Also to "delay" the start of the other leagues you would have to keep them from filling, because they'll start once they fill. That could result in the league accidentally not getting started if someone has an issue that takes them off WIS.

Finally, staggering the leagues could (unintentionally) give a slight advantage to people whose teams do the best in the earliest leagues, because by the time it gets to the second half of the season in later leagues, some folks are probably going to realize they're out of the running for the overall crown. Their waning interest would, in that scenario, potentially make the later leagues easier to rack up wins as some people mentally check out.

I do think it would be fun to have the playoffs sort of staggered across the five leagues, but in the end I think it's easier to manage, and more in keeping with the spirit of the league, to run them all at once.

I agree with every single point

I think tarheel nailed it. I concur.

Tarheel's wrote up works for me.

so minis ok?

all five leagues will run at once

Posted by copernicus on 6/8/2020 1:30:00 PM (view original):
so minis ok?

not sure what youre asking here

you can use partial seasons...you cannot use multiple partial seasons from the same year

if you have a player with less than 5 seasons, use a 239k scrub for the missing seasons and put them on rest

Posted by dBKC on 6/6/2020 8:49:00 PM (view original):
One pick I wish I could take back: Dave Cowens

His minutes are his biggest selling point but I’m barely playing him on each team and I could’ve easily found someone who could’ve done more in that amount of minutes.

anyone else have any regretful picks?

If there was an add/drop, I'd have dropped Alvan Adams. That's for sure

I would have picked a PG by the 7th round. I'm going to find out what the bare minimum number of assists is required that's for sure. Barely putting 50% assists on the floor at times.

Posted by pexetera on 6/8/2020 5:27:00 PM (view original):
I would have picked a PG by the 7th round. I'm going to find out what the bare minimum number of assists is required that's for sure. Barely putting 50% assists on the floor at times.

That's fine. I'm not sure there's anybody that has done more testing with ast% than me, and I've talked at length about it with a few other owners. I've done spreadsheet analysis of every team in every format after the season is over for almost a decade. 50% seems to be the floor for a penalty to occur, but it could possibly be below 50% (I haven't been willing to test that in a controlled environment but I have had a few prog teams come up below 50% and noticed a big decline in fg% in a situation where normally players shoot well above their rl fg%).

I don't think ast% works linear fashion like we always reckoned. I think it works in tiers. You see significant boosts to fg% at different levels instead of seeing a general increase over time. My theory is that it begins with a zero boost at 50% and the next tier isn't till 75% (and every 25% thereafter). I did a lot of testing with values over 100% and saw this reflected exactly as I've described. I have done less below 100, but I've consistently seen no boost at 60 that I didn't have at 50, but did see at 75.

All of that said, I haven't done an exact controlled experiment (I would need to run all 24 teams in multiple leagues to do this) and so my findings are not gospel by any means... but in my experience, 50% ast% is fine, and if you can't get at least 75%, there's no real point in getting extra ast% on the floor if there are cap concerns or player restrictions that might prohibit you from getting better players elsewhere...

...but as always, your mileage may vary.

Posted by ashamael on 6/8/2020 7:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pexetera on 6/8/2020 5:27:00 PM (view original):
I would have picked a PG by the 7th round. I'm going to find out what the bare minimum number of assists is required that's for sure. Barely putting 50% assists on the floor at times.

That's fine. I'm not sure there's anybody that has done more testing with ast% than me, and I've talked at length about it with a few other owners. I've done spreadsheet analysis of every team in every format after the season is over for almost a decade. 50% seems to be the floor for a penalty to occur, but it could possibly be below 50% (I haven't been willing to test that in a controlled environment but I have had a few prog teams come up below 50% and noticed a big decline in fg% in a situation where normally players shoot well above their rl fg%).

I don't think ast% works linear fashion like we always reckoned. I think it works in tiers. You see significant boosts to fg% at different levels instead of seeing a general increase over time. My theory is that it begins with a zero boost at 50% and the next tier isn't till 75% (and every 25% thereafter). I did a lot of testing with values over 100% and saw this reflected exactly as I've described. I have done less below 100, but I've consistently seen no boost at 60 that I didn't have at 50, but did see at 75.

All of that said, I haven't done an exact controlled experiment (I would need to run all 24 teams in multiple leagues to do this) and so my findings are not gospel by any means... but in my experience, 50% ast% is fine, and if you can't get at least 75%, there's no real point in getting extra ast% on the floor if there are cap concerns or player restrictions that might prohibit you from getting better players elsewhere...

...but as always, your mileage may vary.

I've actually got an answer on this from admin. Took me about a solid month of pestering. I might actually have done more testing with ast% then Ash, at least when it comes to testing the floor, especially in draft leagues. In the ODL, I had a few teams in a row, constantly at about 50%. The strategy was that you can't buy everything with the small cap so you have to sacrifice something. If could have superior everything else, and low assists without getting penalized I would have an advantage. I had a 60 win team this way, and one 56 win champion. However, I've found 60% in that league is a little more consistent.

What I know for sure, and has been confirmed by admin:

- It's not linear, it's a step-function.
- 50% is definitely the floor. Anything below that, your efficiency will be penalized.
- Between 50% and the next step (whatever that is), there is no boost.
- For each step after, there is an incremental boost

What I think based on conversations with admin and testing:

- The next 5 steps are 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, and 100%
- Small incremental boosts at each step
- Large boost at 100%
- Steps after 100% go up by 20 %
- Large boosts for each step after 100%
- Harsh penalties for dropping under 50%
- Harsh penalties for each 10% drop under 50%