Posted by benhoidal on 9/19/2019 10:53:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 10:11:00 AM (view original):
But, this is a theory we can test. Try drafting a team with no drafted players over 400 FTAs. If it can win 48 games in any league, I stand corrected.

I recently won 71 games in an open league without a single player over 400 FTAs. Not the same thing as a draft league, but your theory isn't how the sim does free throws. Your fouls have no correlation to your own free throw attempts.

No, of course not - although with the passing, rebounding available to you in an open league, FTAs couldn't matter less.

FTAs balance out your own fouls and cause your opponent to foul you. I don't see the point in ignoring it - or the difference in scoring between Kevin Durant and Shaq.

Mookie
Jordan
Korver
Boozer
Noah

The joy of attempting to build a competitive team around MJ...

Posted by dBKC on 9/19/2019 11:01:00 AM (view original):
By my count I have about $156k/82

Am I doing the math right? I don’t work with per/82 myself. I need about 5900 minutes and I have $11,232,934 left.

69-70 Frazier
18-19 Beal
17-18 Durant
78-79 Unseld
18-19 Gobert
= 13376 mins at $35.7m

I still don’t get the Walt hate. Medium usage, 54.1 eFG, 21.5 AST, 90 D, can guard 3 positions, good rebounding for a PG.

Yeah, I had different seasons pegged.

Durant, Kevin	12-13 Thunder
Gobert, Rudy	18-19 Jazz
Beal, Bradley	18-19 Wizards
Frazier, Walt	69-70 Knicks
Unseld, Wes	75-76 Bullets

Posted by cjok1051 on 9/19/2019 11:07:00 AM (view original):
Mookie
Jordan
Korver
Boozer
Noah

The joy of attempting to build a competitive team around MJ...

Mookie and the Bulls.

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 10:09:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 9:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 6:02:00 AM (view original):
Walt gets to the line a lot for the shots he takes and probably rebounds better than the guys you’re thinking of, rob. His per minute price really isn’t that bad, and I tend to think that low foul guards are very important. If he can afford Frazier, he’s getting 37ish minutes of 90 D, .47 FTA/FGA and 20+ Ast%, and I love not wasting usage on guys who don’t score well.

RL FTAs don't translate very well in the SIM and are usually a waste of money.

True, because the other team may have more and there are only so many in a given game. I've definitely seen evidence of FTr (i.e. FTA/FGA ratio) though, which is why Dwight and DeAndre can get to the line more than they take a field goal attempt. If there only so many shots the SIM will give you in any given game, there are only so many free throw attempts that will come from those shots. If you have a guy who takes a lot of shots but rarely gets to the line, there will be less shots (and hence less FTAs) for players who would get to the line in real life. There's no question that Tyson and DeAndre get to the line a lot for players with such low usage, and there's no doubt that Magic and Shaq will get to the line. The question is if you've allotted enough usage for guys to get enough shots to go to the line. It's nice to add a guy like Shawn Kemp or Buck Williams, because they make up for their fouls with FTAs. If you don't draft a lot of fouls, I don't think you need free throws as much.

I think it is cool that you are coming up with theories on how to build better teams. I think trying to figure out how the sim works is the right building block to getting better at this. Couple things though:

1) Ignore totals... things like FTAs, you can ignore them. Free throw rate is poorly translated. You get charged for it but you don't get the same ROI that you do for other things. It is about creating the most leverage you can for the least amount of money.

2) " If you have a guy who takes a lot of shots but rarely gets to the line, there will be less shots " - I am not sure what your line of thinking here but this sounds like nonsense to me. So does this: " only so many shots the SIM will give you in any given game "

3) Whatever you were saying about building a team with no players less than 400 FTAs is crazy on multiple levels, especially considering that short minute seasons are a way better ROI than big minute seasons (ie. partial season versus full season).

Posted by dBKC on 9/19/2019 11:01:00 AM (view original):
By my count I have about $156k/82

Am I doing the math right? I don’t work with per/82 myself. I need about 5900 minutes and I have $11,232,934 left.

69-70 Frazier
18-19 Beal
17-18 Durant
78-79 Unseld
18-19 Gobert
= 13376 mins at $35.7m

I still don’t get the Walt hate. Medium usage, 54.1 eFG, 21.5 AST, 90 D, can guard 3 positions, good rebounding for a PG.

It's not really Walt hate. He is fine. It is just whether or not his skill set justifies the cost in a relatively low capped league. I don't think he is but a lot of owners do. There aren't really any wrong answers.

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 11:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 10:09:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 9:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 6:02:00 AM (view original):
Walt gets to the line a lot for the shots he takes and probably rebounds better than the guys you’re thinking of, rob. His per minute price really isn’t that bad, and I tend to think that low foul guards are very important. If he can afford Frazier, he’s getting 37ish minutes of 90 D, .47 FTA/FGA and 20+ Ast%, and I love not wasting usage on guys who don’t score well.

RL FTAs don't translate very well in the SIM and are usually a waste of money.

True, because the other team may have more and there are only so many in a given game. I've definitely seen evidence of FTr (i.e. FTA/FGA ratio) though, which is why Dwight and DeAndre can get to the line more than they take a field goal attempt. If there only so many shots the SIM will give you in any given game, there are only so many free throw attempts that will come from those shots. If you have a guy who takes a lot of shots but rarely gets to the line, there will be less shots (and hence less FTAs) for players who would get to the line in real life. There's no question that Tyson and DeAndre get to the line a lot for players with such low usage, and there's no doubt that Magic and Shaq will get to the line. The question is if you've allotted enough usage for guys to get enough shots to go to the line. It's nice to add a guy like Shawn Kemp or Buck Williams, because they make up for their fouls with FTAs. If you don't draft a lot of fouls, I don't think you need free throws as much.

I think it is cool that you are coming up with theories on how to build better teams. I think trying to figure out how the sim works is the right building block to getting better at this. Couple things though:

1) Ignore totals... things like FTAs, you can ignore them. Free throw rate is poorly translated. You get charged for it but you don't get the same ROI that you do for other things. It is about creating the most leverage you can for the least amount of money.

2) " If you have a guy who takes a lot of shots but rarely gets to the line, there will be less shots " - I am not sure what your line of thinking here but this sounds like nonsense to me. So does this: " only so many shots the SIM will give you in any given game "

3) Whatever you were saying about building a team with no players less than 400 FTAs is crazy on multiple levels, especially considering that short minute seasons are a way better ROI than big minute seasons (ie. partial season versus full season).

Counter:

1) Is Steve Nash going to get to the line 500 times in a season? No. Is Dwight Howard going to get to the line 400 times in a season? Yes. Unless you can demonstrate that real life FTAs have no significance whatsoever, I think there is a correlation, which I can prove. I'm sure that SIM FTAs are no less than 50% of real life FTAs, but no more than 115%, depending on rebounds, possession battle, team eFG%, etc.

2) My line of thinking is that if Steph Curry wants to shoot 20 times a game, and Tracy McGrady wants to shoot 22 times a game, good luck getting Buck Williams or Larry Nance to the line.

3) OK, prove it.

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 11:52:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 11:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 10:09:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 9:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 6:02:00 AM (view original):
Walt gets to the line a lot for the shots he takes and probably rebounds better than the guys you’re thinking of, rob. His per minute price really isn’t that bad, and I tend to think that low foul guards are very important. If he can afford Frazier, he’s getting 37ish minutes of 90 D, .47 FTA/FGA and 20+ Ast%, and I love not wasting usage on guys who don’t score well.

RL FTAs don't translate very well in the SIM and are usually a waste of money.

True, because the other team may have more and there are only so many in a given game. I've definitely seen evidence of FTr (i.e. FTA/FGA ratio) though, which is why Dwight and DeAndre can get to the line more than they take a field goal attempt. If there only so many shots the SIM will give you in any given game, there are only so many free throw attempts that will come from those shots. If you have a guy who takes a lot of shots but rarely gets to the line, there will be less shots (and hence less FTAs) for players who would get to the line in real life. There's no question that Tyson and DeAndre get to the line a lot for players with such low usage, and there's no doubt that Magic and Shaq will get to the line. The question is if you've allotted enough usage for guys to get enough shots to go to the line. It's nice to add a guy like Shawn Kemp or Buck Williams, because they make up for their fouls with FTAs. If you don't draft a lot of fouls, I don't think you need free throws as much.

I think it is cool that you are coming up with theories on how to build better teams. I think trying to figure out how the sim works is the right building block to getting better at this. Couple things though:

1) Ignore totals... things like FTAs, you can ignore them. Free throw rate is poorly translated. You get charged for it but you don't get the same ROI that you do for other things. It is about creating the most leverage you can for the least amount of money.

2) " If you have a guy who takes a lot of shots but rarely gets to the line, there will be less shots " - I am not sure what your line of thinking here but this sounds like nonsense to me. So does this: " only so many shots the SIM will give you in any given game "

3) Whatever you were saying about building a team with no players less than 400 FTAs is crazy on multiple levels, especially considering that short minute seasons are a way better ROI than big minute seasons (ie. partial season versus full season).

Counter:

1) Is Steve Nash going to get to the line 500 times in a season? No. Is Dwight Howard going to get to the line 400 times in a season? Yes. Unless you can demonstrate that real life FTAs have no significance whatsoever, I think there is a correlation, which I can prove. I'm sure that SIM FTAs are no less than 50% of real life FTAs, but no more than 115%, depending on rebounds, possession battle, team eFG%, etc.

2) My line of thinking is that if Steph Curry wants to shoot 20 times a game, and Tracy McGrady wants to shoot 22 times a game, good luck getting Buck Williams or Larry Nance to the line.

3) OK, prove it.

No one is saying FTAs have no correlation. I am saying they cost more than the value they return.

Prove what: that partial seasons cost less per minute or **** away money to build some bullshit team of people with 390 FTAs to disprove some hairbrained theory you have? Because if it is the latter, we can just point to team's like the one ben already mentioned to show they work just fine.

Again, I like where your head is at. FTAs are just a weird hill to die on.

My point is that it's almost impossible to build a team where none of your players get to the line 7 times a game in a draft league. More to the point, you haven't done it. I can't ignore them because they are a source of scoring. I can make up for it with eFG%, but why not have both? You'll score more points if you do it all.

I don't remember when this was, but in either this league or the ODL, a team won the championship starting a guy whose last name is Love and my starting SG in the DH52 league. thomcat won the ODL after drafting a guy named Oscar in the 2nd round (but, granted, that was three or four years ago).

FTAs definitely matter and shouldn't be ignored. The question is how much they matter, not whether they matter at all.

I'm not disputing that quality is always better than minutes, and I'm not dying on the FTA hill. In fact, my hill is TS%/PP48. I'm just saying they matter. There's a difference between Kevin Durant and Shaq, and there's a difference between Walt Frazier and Eric Bledsoe.

there should be fulcrum point between your FTAs and opp PFs (and vice versa) but of the various battles in the box score it is a smaller and less reliable one

For the record, you said ignore FTAs on this page. It's not the same thing as saying they cost more value than they return.

See, it's when you use words like "hairbrained" that really tick me off. This is a discussion. If you don't want to have it, opt out.

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 12:15:00 PM (view original):
See, it's when you use words like "hairbrained" that really tick me off. This is a discussion. If you don't want to have it, opt out.

I guess my point is that if you are using TS% and usage, everything useful about FTs is already included in those metrics and thus, yes, you can ignore FTAs.

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 12:15:00 PM (view original):
See, it's when you use words like "hairbrained" that really tick me off. This is a discussion. If you don't want to have it, opt out.

Yeah, I can see that. I was trying to carefully choose my words to try and make a point without causing offense. I generally try and focus on issues and numbers and not make a personal attack. I clearly failed at that here and chose my words poorly. My bad man.

Also, I am wondering... it is probably hare-brained and not hair-brained eh? I don't know that I have ever typed it out before. Hare-brained makes more sense I guess...