Name	Team	Pos	Usage%	2pt%#	3pt%#	eFG%	OReb%	DReb%	Ast%	Stl%	Blk%
James Harden	14-15 Rockets	SG	31.3	47.7	37.4	51.1	2.6	13.1	24.8	2.3	1.1
Larry Bird	87-88 Celtics	SF	30.2	54.2	42	55.6	4.4	21.1	17.3	1.8	1
Mike Miller	07-08 Grizzlies	SF	20.4	55.5	42.9	59.6	2.3	18.5	12.9	0.6	0.4
Wes Unseld	75-76 Bullets	C	11.3	59.5	30	57.8	9.7	24.5	16.1	1.2	1.1
Joakim Noah	13-14 Bulls	C	18.8	47.3	0	47.5	10.7	23	21.4	1.7	2.6
Eddy Curry	05-06 Knicks	C	24.2	56.2	0	56.3	9.1	18	1.4	0.7	1.9
Jalen Rose	95-96 Nuggets	SF	20.1	51.8	29.3	50.7	2.3	10.9	30.7	1.1	1.1

There may be a small change or not as I am tinkering a little, but this looks pretty much like what I am going to go with.

Hardened, why did you pick Curry? Just wondering.

Posted by jt7king on 10/20/2015 8:25:00 PM (view original):
Hardened, why did you pick Curry? Just wondering.

Soft hands?

I needed post usage.  24% @ 56.3% EFG fits the bill.

He isn't a defensive master or a board hoarder, although he isn't abysmal.  Since so much of my high usage is Perimeter and Midrange I knew that I needed solid usage off the bench in the paint.  Plus he should insure that I stay out of the penalty both individual and team.

feel pretty good about it...for once i have enough for a respectable bench...lebron should dominate with the good ast% and the way the usg is distributed...kinda worried nash is gonna average 5 topg tho...ill be hiding love on the other teams worst frontcourt player(he can switch onto sfs) but his d is still gonna kill me...at least his 32% dreb and 2.7 fp48 help on that end...the 00-01 mutombo is probably the best pick for the odl but i felt like i had good enough rebounding and really wanted some paint scoring from him....i was gonna use that mutombo if i picked amare instead of love...had a tough choice between amare, boozer, and love...all 3 could have worked here

hmmm.....only thing i really debated was 10-11 Paul Pierce instead of D Manning. i keep thinking that one bad defensive starter is what derails some really good teams. i've got some really good shot diversity - cheeks at 59% midrange, CP at 30% perimeter, Kemp and Boerwinkle over 55% paint. so i figured one half midrange, half paint player in DM isn't gonna kill my eFG%. i don't know......still testing some things out as a novice. if i don't strike gold with this team, i'll definitely know what to do next time, but i honestly believe the Düsseldorf Crocodiles (what what!) will make the playoffs. curious to hear Ben's POV.

Posted by hardened on 10/20/2015 10:09:00 PM (view original):
I needed post usage.  24% @ 56.3% EFG fits the bill.

He isn't a defensive master or a board hoarder, although he isn't abysmal.  Since so much of my high usage is Perimeter and Midrange I knew that I needed solid usage off the bench in the paint.  Plus he should insure that I stay out of the penalty both individual and team.

Ok. I've always avoided him because of his rebounding but that makes sense.

Updated through round 6. Once the teams are all visible, I will give everyone an overall write-up and then make some predictions! I've got 6 out of 8 division winners right in my previous attempts at ODL predictions and to my knowledge am the only one to ever correctly pick the champion. Can I do it again?

nice work

Final updated evaluations.

ODL 58 Champion: slymonium

Great job! Loved reading them. Would be interested to hear a bit more on why I Havevthe wrong Walton.

first time I have ever composed a team considered worthy of the playoffs  (if only marginally) . . . 

considering that at other times I actually did make the playoffs -- does that mean I am now doomed ? ? ? 

Fantastic job Ben!

Posted by jhsukow on 10/27/2015 8:39:00 PM (view original):
Great job! Loved reading them. Would be interested to hear a bit more on why I Havevthe wrong Walton.

Just a personal preference I guess. 78 Walton is still very good, but I prefer 77. His lower usage% is better for his efg%, he has slightly better rebounding and defense, and although his ast% is slightly down, his to% is significantly lower. They are comparable though, so I suppose I shouldn't have used wrong as a descriptor.