Posted by logain on 8/22/2011 5:46:00 PM (view original):
This is where I get confused.
The original thing that snydpie posted was with the intention of considering longevity in our picks. Thus, I interpreted we were aiming at a 5-10 year window for players. Like, if I was going to start a franchise who would I take.
Then when we started talking about tournaments and things.. it really doesn't make sense to play teams against each other unless you consider individual seasons.
Thus I think we are supposed to consider longevity somehow based on the original intent. But, I'm not sure how to weigh that impact.
i think most of us are confused about this....
heres what i think we should absolutely do:
- have each owner rank all the teams 1-16 based on the original premise which was how great a player is/was in his prime along with how great his career was...the owners will have to decide for themselves how to properly mix the two when deciding...for example: i would consider bill walton a better pick then alonzo mourning based on the fact that waltons prime was so great
- have each owner sitemail the rankings to the commish or someone else(i nominate logain) to tally up the results and post them in the forum....from that we will have our overall, original idea winner
- then break the teams into the tournament we were talking about with the seedings already figured out from the rankings we just did...for the tourney we will be considering head to head matchups so you need to specify which season(or point in their career like early bucks kareem or something like that) you are using of each player
i think this would be most fun and would satisfy everyone...thoughts?