11) vancem - Chris Paul, Bill Walton, Julius Erving, Mike Miller, Jerome Williams, Michael Redd, Gheorghe Muresan

well, at first glance, this team is well-balanced and the usage% fits rather nicely. the big horse on this squad is dr. j, which is both a good thing and a bad thing. he has nice numbers, depending on the version you use, which in my opinion, is his 6.9 reb season with nice shooting percentages. his big board seasons are full of t.o.'s, and if you give any team in a 52 mil league that extra edge in the possession war, you usually come out on the bottom of the score. however, this team is short on boards, and vancem will need to use one of dr. j's big board seasons i would think. whenever a team has three very good 3-point shooters, i like to stack up on orebs whenever possible. walton does not do that (but he does have nice drebs). redd, miller and paul can actually hurt an opponent pretty badly, if there's a dominant scorer in the post (the classic sim mold). perhaps walton is enough to prevent teams from using +2 def settings, but his minutes are rather limited. though sometimes, he is good for 20 pts, but he's not consistent doing that. so, that leaves dr. j again to score, and he of course loses 16% of his possessions (a.k.a., oscar, and baylor). of course, theres always big, ugly-a-s-s Gheorghe Muresan and his 58% efg% and 1100 pts. i like him actually, and he'll provide some orebs to boot... but the man plays 2200 mins and commits a whopping 297 fouls! good god. still, i have to go back to my original statement, this team's strength lies in its balance, and vancem's ace in the hole, when he least expects it will be jerome williams. this may sound strange, but as jerome goes, the team will go. he really needs to shine on the boards, especially his oreb% for vancem to make a serious run. not a bad team though. HIGHLY efficient shooting %'s i would think. good for 48 wins. B. on the precipice of the playoffs.


 

Really wanted Sabonis in round 4 but that hope was dashed by Ash

I didn't have a fourth round draft pick.  I took Sabonis in the 5th.

Wallace was a sweet pick at the 3 for this team in the 3^rd round. Confused by the Josh Smith pick in round 4. Smith and Wallace basically play the same position but the later is much better and plays 39 MPG in his best season.

Not sure if you've realized it or not, but Wallace's 09-10 season is 100% at SG... and that's a TON of boards at the 2.  Kat says he wants to win without a lot of threes... I say good luck with that, but board dominance goes a long way towards that end.

I value Josh Smith's def ish higher, he rebounds way better, he blocks shots and even his Ast% is higher. He is not shooting treys but thats about it...

I did miss that Wallace is at 100% SG for the 0910 season. I like the Josh Smith pick a lot better now. 

My brain farts are truly bad. What happened Ash was that I thought that I would somehow be able to get Mike Miller, Jerome Williams, and Sabonis in rounds 4 through 6. I knew that Miller and Williams wouldn't last until round 6 for me. I figured that the only people that had taken Sabonis in this draft in the past were me, uvasooner, and our old friend monkee. So I gambled that Sabonis would be there for me in round 6. I felt that if I did miss on Sabonis lasting until round 6 then Gadzuric would be there for sure for me in that round.

So when you got Sabonis in round five and then took Gadzuric a few picks ahead of me in round 6 my original plan got blow to pieces. I should have drafted Sabonis in round 4. My bad.

Original Plan = Walton/Sabonis at Center and Jerome Williams/Dan Gadzurich at PF.

this is so old... good god

I agree on Barros.  I wanted Frazier, but was late, so sixernuggets took him while I was searching.  I should have taken Harper in the 4th round and gone with a different shooting guard in the 5th.  I tried to make Barros work as a backup, but did not like it.

We will see what happens.

Garyman: Loved the Bird pick and he deserved to be chosen  higher than 14.  In fact I should have taken him at 12.  I don’t like Willis at this pick when Walton, Parish, and Daniels were available. Willis’s relatively low FG% and fairly high usage don’t’ seem to fit the best with Bird. Blalock in round 3 was a great pick. Clifford Ray taken in round 4 is baffeling when Pryzbilla, Dampier, Jerome Williams and Gadzurich were all available. West fits in well with Blalock and was a good value in round 5. One of the round 6 picks seems to be wasted by taking 2 bigs when you already had Willis and Ray. I like Horace Grant here better than Jeff Foster. A very low turnover team.
_________________________________________________
Vance - about my "C" grade - here's some quick feedback re your assessment.

Bird - yes he should be higher. about 10-12 now that strong SFs are a dying breed. People panic and almost always choose PF/Cs before him though.
Willis - yes he is the question mark. We have a ton of assists so if he can raise his eFG% to 50, I'll be happy.
Mookie - agree, easiest pick I had.
Ray - disagree here. Look at the guy's ast%. I drafted him for his D, reb%, and ast%. All of the other 4 you mentioned are in the low single digits. I don't care for Przybilla's 60% eFG if he's only got 10% usage. You should've said something about Ray's super high fouls.
West - agree. anyone who drafts the Logo in round 5 gets great value.
Ho Grant and Foster - Not wasted picks by choosing 2 bigs as you mentioned. Grant will spell Bird at SF.

Your C grade is fair, imo, but the road you took to get there is a bit twisted. This team is borderline, postseason-wise. My team last season was way stronger than this one. I think If I used a stronger West season, we would have a better chance. Who knows.. That's the one head scratcher I still have - did I draft the right West season.....

Let's get some comments going after the 1/2 way point in the season to see how well the predictions were. I'm shooting for hopefully close to 70% accuracy.

Big time F for me for giving sappy's team an A. I fell in love with the RL games of the players and their names. As we all know the SIM is anti-real life.