RotoGuru Basketball Forum

View the Forum Registry

Self-edit this thread
0 Subject: RIHC - Draft discussion thread #1

Posted by: Guru - [330592710] Sat, Oct 04, 2003, 13:13
This thread will be used for discussion of the draft picks in the RotoGuru Invitational Hoops Challenge league. The picks are presented in a separate thread, but managers are expected to provide a brief rationale for each pick in this thread. Others should feel free to make comments here as well. The purpose of this thread is to explore the thought processes behind the draft picks, and to challenge and/or question the assumptions behind them.

In addition, if there are procedural issues related to the draft, they can be raised here. As this thread gets to be lengthy, I will create successor threads.

A draft recap is also available for convenient reference.
1rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 461124288
      Sat, Oct 04, 2003, 13:25 		Can I make a suggestion for this thread?

I think it is best if RIHC owners and especially observers refrain from comments on player yet to be drafted. It should go without saying, but posting something like "Wow, it's a good thing Guru didn't take Player X, I heard he just tore up his knee" should be left out of the commentary. Perhaps if anything inapproriate is posted, Guru could sprinkle some magic edit dust.

Sorry to bring it up, just one of my pet peaves.
2coldwater coyotes
      SuperDude
      ID: 33742418
      Sat, Oct 04, 2003, 19:19 		While Garnett had to figure in the decision, my final choice came down to Nowitzki or Duncan as they both qualify as Centers. Nowitzki should produce in all categories while Duncan will only produce in 5 categories. There is the risk, although small that Nowitzki's production will go down with Jamison's presence.
In the end I felt that blocks will be a harder category to fill then 3pts. and Duncan's FT percentage will improve this year.
3rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 27652109
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 11:31 		Just FYI-

I'm not holding up on purpose. I have been negitiating to trade #2 pick, once I make a deal or the deal is dead, I will proceed. Estmate 24-36 hours max.

4Tree
      Donor
      ID: 594468
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 14:19 		i realize i'm not part of this league, but post two is absolutely hysterical - in a Christopher Guest kind of way - on the heels of post one.

RFS - FWIW, it's one of my pet peeves too...
5Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 14:26 		Perhaps it would be better to wait for about a round to post each pick rationale. That way, the draft has a chance to proceed for a dozen picks without risk of "contaminating the time line".
6ukula
      Donor
      ID: 59921612
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 15:00 		Maybe we should wait until the end of the draft to discuss our picks. Each team can then talk about each of their picks and the logic behind them. It's going to be hard not to mention other players, plus you don't want to give away your draft strategy each round.
7Rand
      Donor
      ID: 364152215
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 15:23 		Tree, glad you're amused, but nothing is more
hysterical than somebody drafting Eddy Curry
with the 13th pick. Dude, you should get some
sort of prize for that one! lol.
8Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 31649212
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 16:21 		This might seem like overkill, but maybe we should have 3 threads:

(a) The draft thread... picks only
(b) This thread, for general public discussion
(c) The "pick rationale" thread (doesn't exist yet)

I also agree that thread (c) should be at least a round behind the actual draft. People can use their judgement as to how much strategy they want to give away when, etc., but you'll be able to "say more" if we wait a round or two.

I think we could also have a "draft recap" for each manager at the end of thread (c) where managers discuss what their overall strategies were, what they might have done different in retrospect, suprises, etc.

One last point is that the posts in thread (c)should be in the same order as the actual draft picks (wait for other managers until your turn is up). This might require a little extra time/effort, but is worth it.

Just my .02, thoughts?
9coldwater coyotes
      SuperDude
      ID: 57111916
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 16:36 		I fail to see what the fuss is all about??
What harm has been done by my comments? What shouldn't I have said? If I want to give away my strategy and my rationale that is my decision. I have not mislead anybody about other players.
10Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 31649212
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 16:56 		Well, the general rule is don't discuss anyone who hasn't been drafted yet. Now, in the first round, I don't think this is such a big deal, because it's pretty obvious who the top few picks are... but I think the concern is more as a precedent for later in the draft when people are looking for "diamonds in the rough", etc... nobody wants to see someone else mention their prospect publicly, only to have some other manager take that player, etc. Again, I don't think it's a big deal in this particular case.

My suggestion for the seperate thread had little to do with that issue, but more to do with keeping the pick rationales ordered in a nice, neat location, seperated the clutter of the more general discussion which will take place here.
12rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 27652109
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 17:01 		For the record, I confirm the trade Doug posted in the picks thread. Will wait for commissioner approval before considering ita "done deal"

13coldwater coyotes
      SuperDude
      ID: 57111916
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 17:12 		Doug.. I don't think you answer my questions. I am not so stupid as to give away a specific strategy (eg giving up on a specific category to focus on the other seven) or to give away valuable info such as X is having a great pre-season. I thought that this was an intelligent and very competitive group (at least as far as Basketball is concerned) and Guru suggestions that if we wish we could write a few words about our picks was an interesting concept.
14Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 17:42 		I think Doug has made a good suggestion.

We will defer posting pick rationales until there is a 2 round lag. These will appear in a separate thread (yet to be created). When you make your pick in round three, you may post your Round 1 discussion. If there are elements of your picking strategy that you wish to keep silent about until later, that's certainly OK, too, although you should be able to say something about your pick with a 2 round lag. At the end of the draft, each manager will have the opportunity to provide any further discussion - overall plan, what went well, what didn't work out, etc.

This thread will be for general discussion - which can come from managers in the league, or from anyone else.

coldwater - I think your posted rationale was fine. Clearly, Nowitzki is not someone who was going to evade anyone's stream of consciousness. But the general concept of avoiding discussion of unpicked players is a good one - especially in the mid and later rounds.
15Tree
      Donor
      ID: 594468
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 18:32 		Rand, post 7 - it's a league with two centers, and Yahoo has a serious dearth of good centers. Curry's numbers in the second half of the season were outstanding, and the man was the 4th pick in the draft several seasons ago.

i'm a risk taker in drafts, and yes, it's a mighty big risk. but let's file your post away, and see what kind of season a healthy eddy curry has at the end of the season.
16Rand
      Donor
      ID: 364152215
      Mon, Oct 06, 2003, 19:53 		Tree, Curry is a fine player, so good luck with
that. I guess I shouldn't have mentioned your
choice in this thread, since we are trying to
avoid analysis of undrafted players. I still find it
pretty funny though:)
17Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 2730280
      Tue, Oct 07, 2003, 04:43 		Dave R - I think that's the first (and probably last) time I've ever heard a fantasy manager curse because they got "stuck" with KG... =-)
18Dave R - Hilton Head
      ID: 51948320
      Tue, Oct 07, 2003, 07:48 		Doug, you know what I mean, I really was hoping Dirk would fall in my lap, good pick.
But I can't complain much, I just liked Dirks C/F availability
19ukula
      Donor
      ID: 20831621
      Wed, Oct 08, 2003, 05:51 		question - how do you put your pick in BOLD in the draft pick thread?
20philflyboy
      Leader
      ID: 407561421
      Wed, Oct 08, 2003, 06:57 		here it is Ukula [b]1.1 your pick here[/b] replace the [] with <> and you have it
21ukula
      Donor
      ID: 1891786
      Wed, Oct 08, 2003, 08:17 		Thanks.
22beastiemiked
      Sustainer
      ID: 3531815
      Wed, Oct 08, 2003, 09:36 		Just a heads up for all you guys. Check position eligibility in Yahoo before drafting a player. I got burned in another league by drafting a player that started 20+ games at center but for whatever reason isn't listed as center eligible in Yahoo.
23Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 31649212
      Wed, Oct 08, 2003, 13:19 		Thanks beastie... Guru was kind enough to send out a spreadsheet with all of Yahoo's eligibility included, so I think we should be good on that front.
24Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Oct 08, 2003, 13:44 		It's an important consideration, and one reason why I wouldn't want to start a draft without first knowing what the eligibilities are.

Since many of you use Yahoo, perhaps a brief recap of center eligibility is appropriate.

Based upon my ranking of the top N players, here is the number that are eligible for C:
 N  Centers
100    17
144    31
180    39

If you are in a 10 team league which requires 2 centers, then some teams are going to have to reach to find their centers, as only 17 of the top 100 players are eligible. You might quibble with my rankings, but I suspect most reasonable ranking systems would have a similar result.

Our league has 12 teams with 12 active slots including 2 centers. Thus, 144 players might constitute the more relevant pool of players for us to consider. This universe has 31 centers. Since we only need to collectively start 24 of them, it would seem that there is an ample supply, and that position scarcity needn't create a premature run on centers. After all, what's the difference if your last two players picked are centers (ranked in the 120-144 range), or if your last two are comparably-ranked guards and/or forwards?

Similarly, our full rosters, including bench players, have 15 slots. Of the 180 players to be drafted, it looks like about 39 will be center-eligible. Again, no squeeze is suggested.

Which doesn't mean it won't happen. But before you start chasing inferior centers in your own draft, you might want to reconsider the necessity.
25Dave R - Hilton Head
      ID: 51948320
      Wed, Oct 08, 2003, 19:24 		Any one heard from RFS?
26rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 27652109
      Wed, Oct 08, 2003, 19:49 		I'm here. I'm trying to decide between 2 players and will pick later on tonight (probably).

I know we aren't far enough along to have a pick rationale discussion, but I will say that part of what I was counting on in trading down to #7 was getting Shaq at #7. Hoopsklyce tossed me a cruveball. C'est La Vie. There are sill a few top studs remaining. I'm happy to have one of them.
27hoopsklyce
      Leader
      ID: 5392426
      Wed, Oct 08, 2003, 20:54 		guru
nice analysis of the center postion!!
28hoopsklyce
      Leader
      ID: 5392426
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 08:27 		rfs
if you want shaq I can trade him to you
29Species
      Sustainer
      ID: 569221717
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 12:47 		Would anyone be so kind as to post a short recap of the rules/categories, please? That way I can take potshots at people's picks ;-)
30Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 12:57 		12 teams.

15 roster slots - 4 guard, 4 forward, 2 center, 2 utility, 3 bench. One additional IR slot. No distinction between PG vs SG, or SF vs PF.

Position eligibility according to Yahoo!

Daily roster moves. Active players subject to games played limits, based on 82 games per slot, but applied by position. Thus, the 4 guard slots are limited to 4x82 games played in total, etc.(Obviously, players in Utility slots are counted against Utility limits, not against their normal position limit.)

Roto scoring, based on cumulative rankings (not head-to-head) in 8 categories:
FT%, FG%, total 3-pt, assists, rebounds, blocks, steals, and points

31Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 13:34 		Now that Kobe has been taken, it'd be interesting to hear thoughts about his situation.

I certainly considered him for my #8 pick, but there were just too many uncertainties for me, including:
1. How much will he be able to play?
2. How much will he want to play?
3. How will the addition of Payton and Malone affect his stats?
4. What's his physical condition? I hear that he doesn't appear to be in nearly as good a shape as last year. Will this reduce his minutes, at least for the first month or so? Will the availability of Payton/Malone prompt Phil Jackson to want to (or at least be more willing to) reduce Kobe's minutes this year?

Pierce is certainly a cut below a mentally fit, physically fit, and motivated Kobe. But, how can anyone possibly assess what Kobe will be up to this year?

I decided not to take the Kobe risk with Pierce still available. But we were getting close to the point where the potential rewards were commensurate with the risks.
32Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 31649212
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 14:10 		If I hadn't traded with RFS, I probably would have considered Kobe at #7, but doubt I would have pulled the trigger either. I'm not overly worried about his stats... yes, there's a true PG now, but on the other hand with so much talent on the floor it could be easier to drive and dish to someone for an open jumper, etc... so it's a wash in my mind... same thing with points, other guys are getting shots, but also defense can't collapse on him quite as much, which could help FG% as well. Anyway, there nevertheless is obviously some general uncertainty there, and that combined with the questions of mental distraction, less minutes, possibly missing time, etc. make him too risky for an early pick IMHO. Honestly, I just don't want to finish in the bottom 4 and lose my spot in the league (heh), so I wanted to minimize risk with my round 1 pick.
33Species
      Sustainer
      ID: 569221717
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 14:28 		I think you made the right choice, Guru. I might have even chosen Pierce over Kobe even if the whole sexual assault thing hadn't happened due to the effects of Payton and Malone. Combine Payton and Malone with the trial and I think it's a no-brainer.
34rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 27652109
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 14:31 		FWIW, I didn't seriuosly consider Kobe at #7.... everytime I hear more news, it just seems to be worse.. nothing positive (speaking only as it relates for fantasy hoops).

In a normal year, I'd pounce on him at #7, but he would have been long gone! I figured #8-#10 would be his value.

More comments at the right time, but I struggled between Kidd/Pierce and up to the last minute was leaning towards PP.
35lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 289471616
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 14:37 		That's a tough question, I was almost glad I didn't end up in a situation where I had to debate it. In my position at #11, it would have been easier to take him there had he fallen. With someone as competitive as Kobe, I could see him taking out his off-court problems on the opponents, since he's always seemed driven by the desire to show everybody up. And while I don't know the legal details, it just seems like they're going to be able to delay the proceedings so that they won't start until next summer, although various games off here and there are possible.

However, I do think the stats will be down a bit from last year, even with the added assists and less focus from opposing defenses. He just won't need to go on a month-long tear like he did last year with all the other talent the Lakers have, which brought up a lot of his stats. It would also seem like Phil would reduce his minutes given the opportunity and Kobe's surgery. However, these would be considerations against drafting him in the top 5, but at #9 it could be a great pick.

Darn, and I was hoping Ray Allen would slip through to #11 too...
36Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 14:38 		rfs - for what it's worth, whichever one of Kidd/Pierce that you didn't take was going to be mine. I think I preferred Pierce (thank you), but it was admittedly a close call.
37Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 14:43 		If I had been in a vacuum for the past week, I might have taken Kobe at #8. But the interviews that I saw earlier in the week were very discouraging. He doesn't seem at all like he's ready to play basketball. Certainly not mentally. And probably not phyically, either.

I suspect that he will get his head in the game sooner or later, but he's not there yet. With all of the time that has passed since the arrest, you might expect that he'd be chomping at the bit for an opportunity to channel his energy toward something else. But so far, that does not appear to be the case.
38lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 289471616
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 14:55 		< quick non-Kobe content >
Just wanted to give a heads up that I will be out of touch for a few hours until this evening, so there might be a slight delay before making my next selection after Rand's two picks (sorry I don't have a queue at this point). Gives more time for thinking in case anybody might want to trade up to #14 as well ;)
39Rand
      Donor
      ID: 364152215
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 15:13 		lionprideguy, don't know if you're still around,
but I'm gonna make my picks shortly. I've been
thinking about the 12th and 13th picks so
much I can't stand it anymore.

fwiw, I've actually been ranking Kobe at 12th
pick, I'd rather have Jermo or Ray Allen ahead
of Kobe Bryant this season. Anyway, I'll go pick
a couple of guys and start of the second
round.
40blackjackis21
      Leader
      ID: 444181610
      Thu, Oct 09, 2003, 16:18 		I actually didn't expect Kobe to be one of my options when I found out I had the number 9 pick - I thought he'd be gone, and thought I'd get a crack at one of Pierce, Kidd or Marion - most likely Pierce.

That said, as the news has come out the past few days, I can certainly understand why he fell to me at 9th and am not as excited at having him on my squad as I would have been a week ago. I thought about sitting tight with my pick until Sat. night or whenever the deadline kicks in, but was too anxious to get to my 2nd pick! :)

I may kick myself, but we'll see.
41Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 10, 2003, 11:02 		Looks like we might clear 2 rounds in the "pre-clock" drafting. Maybe more. Good head start!

As previously announced, the 24-hour clock starts tomorrow. Based on this week's experience, we shouldn't need it, but you never know.

Since we never specified a time zone, we'll conservatively use Pacific time to start the clock. Thus, whoever is next to draft at 12:01 am PT (Saturday morning) will have a maximum of 24 hours to make his pick. Thereafter, with each new pick the clock resets to 24 hours.

Again, please do not use the full allotted time unless it is absolutely necessary. We need to average about one round per day in order to complete the draft in a reasonable time frame.

42blackjackis21
      Leader
      ID: 444181610
      Fri, Oct 10, 2003, 12:34 		There's a decent chance this Kobe article might have changed my mind if I'd read it before yesterday. Yuck.

(LA Times free registration required)
43philflyboy
      Leader
      ID: 407561421
      Fri, Oct 10, 2003, 12:34 		I will be away for the weekend and Jumpball will be drafting for me.
44Swish City @ friends
      ID: 31951010
      Fri, Oct 10, 2003, 12:40 		Edgar, please check your email.
45rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 461124288
      Fri, Oct 10, 2003, 21:53 		Well, I decided to take a chance in Webber getting back sooner than later. But that was a tough pick. I didn't think we was going to be there. I figure he will miss 20% of the NBA season so I had to weigh 80% of Webber VS 100% of my alternate choice. I'm gonna mark this one down and see how this pans out at year's end.
46Dave R - Hilton Head
      ID: 51948320
      Fri, Oct 10, 2003, 22:41 		were rules established about changing your pick if the following pick hasnt been made?
47Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 10, 2003, 22:47 		My gut reaction is that "a card laid is a card played."

But I'll defer the to will of the collective.
48Dave R - Hilton Head
      ID: 51948320
      Fri, Oct 10, 2003, 22:59 		I'll let it rest since we porobably wont have enough opinions by the time Edgar picks tomorrow.

If we do then we will figure it out then
49Rand
      Donor
      ID: 364152215
      Fri, Oct 10, 2003, 23:40 		No, I would think you shouldn't be allowed to
change your pick after you've posted your
choice.

I can't imagine how frustrating it could be to...

a) Check out who the guy before you chose,
b) Leave to research and reflect on your own
choice,
c) Return to post your pick,
d) Discover the guy before you changed his
pick while you were gone,
e) His new pick is the guy you had finally
settled on!

50Species
      Sustainer
      ID: 7724916
      Sat, Oct 11, 2003, 00:11 		That's probably a good sport for him, RFS. I was really curious where Webber would go in this draft.
51ukula
      Donor
      ID: 20831621
      Sat, Oct 11, 2003, 00:18 		No changing picks in my opinion.
52lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 906204
      Sat, Oct 11, 2003, 05:35 		I do want to flexible, but my instinct unfortunately is that hitting "post" makes it a done deal. Reduces possible confusion as well, I would think. Although so far in the draft I wouldn't have minded if the person selecting before me had changed their minds, I would have happily given them that option!

On a related note, now that we're in the third round, with the two-round lag starting to pass I know I'm curious to start to hear some discussion on the picks. Whenever we get a chance to start that thread, I'm looking forward to hearing everybody's thoughts on the selections so far.
53hoopsklyce
      Leader
      ID: 5392426
      Sat, Oct 11, 2003, 08:52 		who did edgar pick initially??
how do you make bold font in the draft pick areas
54blackjackis21
      Leader
      ID: 34837521
      Sat, Oct 11, 2003, 09:03 		I don't think Edgar actually made any other pick - I think he was just saying he changed his mind last minute.

For bold:

[b]3.05 Sam Cassell[/b]

replace the []'s with <>'s and it will show up bold.
55hoopsklyce
      Leader
      ID: 5392426
      Sat, Oct 11, 2003, 10:05 		I vote against changing after post
if a player you just picked gets hurt you should not be able to change him out
56Edgar
      Leader
      ID: 458944
      Sat, Oct 11, 2003, 11:37 		The post I made missed the number in the beginning. So I deleted it. I did not change our pick though.

Can we start to dicuss our picks in rounds 1 and 2?
57Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 2730280
      Sat, Oct 11, 2003, 15:45 		I'm heading out for the day... my pick is coming up, but I have a possible trade under discussion, so don't expect a pick or trade announcement until late tonight (for pick 3.7)

I will also try to post my round 1 rationale tonight so that we can move forward with that thread as well. Thanks everyone, hope you are enjoying your respective weekends!!!
58Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Sat, Oct 11, 2003, 20:49 		Anyone heard anything from Ukula?
59Dave R
      Dude
      ID: 1367294
      Sat, Oct 11, 2003, 22:27 		If you look at his first 2 picks there was a signifacant lag between the prior pick and when he actually made his. He's probably out for the night
60ukula
      Donor
      ID: 20831621
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 00:38 		Sorry guys - I had a very important engagement today, we brought the three little ones to see Dora the Explorer. I'll get right on it.
61ukula
      Donor
      ID: 20831621
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 01:10 		OK, I made my pick, sorry for the delay.
62Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 12:36 		I was asked about the application of the 24 hour clock to picks at the turn of the cycle. Does the clock apply to each pick separately or to both picks combined?

We never stipulated a stance, but my sense is that both picks should be subject to the same clock. Thus, if either Rand or coldwater coyotes exceed their 24 hour period, the next person may go ahead, and the two skipped picks will be made up at the next opportunity.

This may be slightly unfair, but the purpose of the clock is not to give each person 24 hours to consider his next pick. It is to keep the draft moving.

Again, I hope that the clock never needs to be invoked at all.
63rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 461124288
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 14:22 		Based on post #43, I sent jumpball an e-mail in case he doesn't know he is up on behalf of pfb.

64blackjackis21
      Leader
      ID: 34837521
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 14:25 		Thanks rfs - I missed that.
66Dave R
      Dude
      ID: 51948320
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 16:50 		I emailed Jumpball twice, he knows hes supposed to do it, i chatted with him last night
67philflyboy
      Leader
      ID: 407561421
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 17:03 		sorry for the hold up I picked
68hoopsklyce
      Leader
      ID: 5392426
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 17:38 		I agree that the consecutive picks are subject to 24 hrs
69Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 19:27 		At least one league manager didn't realize I was posting a draft recap here. Links also appear in the opening post of this thread, and also the discussion thread.

And, the league logo on the blurb page also links to it.
70lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 906204
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 19:47 		Hey Guys - I'm back, just changing my mind back and forth between two players. I'll give myself another 15-20 minutes to torture myself and then see which name is currently written in the message box when I hit "post"
71Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 19:59 		Rand - are you around too? We could get 4 picks in quick order if you are.
72lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 906204
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 20:26 		Man, I went back and forth on this pick a lot. So far, three picks, three players and teams with new coaches. Umm, that might not be a good sign.
73hoopsklyce
      Leader
      ID: 5392426
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 21:11 		think I need another lessen in how to make text bold

did not understand the previous!
74hoopsklyce
      Leader
      ID: 5392426
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 21:12 		bold font test
75hoopsklyce
      Leader
      ID: 5392426
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 21:13 		figured out bold


76lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 906204
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 22:47 		Sorry, I had initially posted this in the rationales thread, but realized it belongs here:

I do have to say Shaq could be a great pick at #5 for hoopsklyce. I live in the LA area and was able to watch a bit of the Laker's first preseason game last week. Shaq looked in the best shape I've seen in years, there is no doubt he lost a good 40+ pounds as has been reported in some places. He was playing with intensity, and seems determined to be a force this year. With his better conditioning, I can potentially see the Lakers running the offense through him first, so he would be the one getting a lot of assists by passing to cutters or the open man in Kobe, GP, or Malone. Not saying he's going to become like Vlade, but in a way I could see him acting like Wilt did and having a game with himself to see how many assists he could get. His decreased weight also reduces injury risk and gives him better mobility and lift to pick up extra blocks. Better defenders around him also free him to roam a bit more for rebounds and blocks. I think these things will more than make up for the lost points.
77Rand
      Donor
      ID: 364152215
      Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 23:22 		Just picked. Didn't end up with guys I thought I
would. Was actually planning on scooping
Redd early, as lionprideguy has done, with my
4.1 pick. And was considering another guy
who shall remain nameless. I just simply
could not let Payton slip to the fourth round, I
couldn't let him get disrespected like that:) I
also had no intention of getting a rookie this
early, even if it was Lebron James, but my
resolve weakened and decided to just give in
to the hype machine and dream of the perfect
rookie season. Well, he should be good for
alot of assists at any rate.
78Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 2730280
      Mon, Oct 13, 2003, 01:04 		Make sure to post that info in the rationale thread when the appropriate time comes. Should be about 2 rounds from now. =-)
79hoopsklyce
      Leader
      ID: 5392426
      Mon, Oct 13, 2003, 06:34 		another potential issue to consider

In the later rounds what if a manager accidently picks a player already taken?
80Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Oct 13, 2003, 09:36 		ukula - I appreciate the speed of your pick this morning. Doug probably didn't however, since it was his turn, not yours.

I deleted your pick.
81ukula
      Donor
      ID: 35924136
      Mon, Oct 13, 2003, 09:40 		oops! I knew I was going to do that at some point.
82Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Oct 13, 2003, 10:18 		Regarding incorrect picks - we now have 2 situations to address. Here are my proposals.

1. If a manager picks out of turn, the pick is simply voided and the draft proceeds as though the pick was not made. However, if that player is still available when the premature drafter's next turn arrives, then that same player must be picked.

2. If someone drafts a player who has already been selected, we will hopefully catch it pronto. At the time that the duplication is discovered, the incorrect drafter will be allowed to make an alternate pick. However, the next manager is already on the clock, and the duplicate pick must be made up under the same guidelines as a skipped pick (i.e., the draft proceeds and the skipped pick is made up ASAP.)

With a little care, there is no reason to make a duplicate selection. Use the "Find" feature of your browser to search for a player name before you post. You can also run the same scan against the recap page, although that page may be missing the most recent picks.

If there is disagreement with either of these guidelines, speak up.


83ukula
      Donor
      ID: 35924136
      Mon, Oct 13, 2003, 10:45 		That's the first time I've ever been called a premature drafter. ;)
84Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Oct 13, 2003, 14:34 		I just re-entered the same pick that I had previously voided for Ukula. HoopsKlyce is now up.

I will be away from approx. 3-11pm today. This should not impact the draft, since I don't think my pick will be due again today. But if there are any issues that require a Commissioner's ruling, you may just have to duke it out amongst yourselves.

...or else just wait until the 4th quarter.
85Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 31649212
      Mon, Oct 13, 2003, 17:10 		Just a status update...

hoopsklyce (4.08) is up in the draft thread, and
lionprideguy (1.11) is up in the draft rationale thread
86rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 461124288
      Mon, Oct 13, 2003, 21:30 		coldwater has been e-mailed. If he happens to pick by 10P PST, I'll pick again. If he picks after that, I'll likely be out for the night.
87lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 289471616
      Mon, Oct 13, 2003, 21:59 		If anybody is interested, my next pick isn't up for a while, and I live on the west coast and am usually up pretty late (in case you couldn't tell from my posts so far!). So if anybody wants to leave even a small one-player queue with me I'd be happy to help out. Something like "I would like to take Anderson Hunt if he is still available," just email me.
88Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 31649212
      Tue, Oct 14, 2003, 16:58 		Where's Ukula? The suspense is killing me... I can deal with being a few picks away, but whenever I'm on deck I can't help but hit refresh every 5 minutes to see if I'm up...

No worries though, not actually complaining, I recognize that I just tend towards the impatient. =-)
89blackjackis21
      Leader
      ID: 444181610
      Tue, Oct 14, 2003, 17:08 		Who you takin'? ;)
91Dave R
      Dude
      ID: 1367294
      Tue, Oct 14, 2003, 17:28 		BJ, you sure are nosy :)
92Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Oct 14, 2003, 17:43 		I have to disappear until about 10pm. If my pick comes up in the meantime, I sent a contingent pick to both Dave R and blackjack.

Unfortunately, I only gave them one choice, so if he is taken in the next two picks, I'm back to the drawing board and you'll have to wait until 10pm. I was hoping to work out a longer queue, but got sidetracked this afternoon.
93Dave R
      Dude
      ID: 1367294
      Tue, Oct 14, 2003, 18:04 		Guru, I didnt recieve anything
94blackjackis21
      Leader
      ID: 34837521
      Tue, Oct 14, 2003, 19:07 		I got it - I should be around most of the night.
95Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 31649212
      Tue, Oct 14, 2003, 21:04 		I may be out for a little while... figured I'd be done by now... I'll pick from home tonight (I hope) and won't be in again until the mid-AM (PST) tomorrow, but probably not an issue since my next pick is 6.11
96Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Oct 14, 2003, 22:22 		Ugh. Still no ukula. I wonder what happened?

Note to others - if you are going to be away for this long, please make alternate arrangements. This draft needs to pick up the pace a bit.
97rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 461124288
      Tue, Oct 14, 2003, 22:26 		Are we still e-mailing the next owner after we pick? I know I have been.

An idea that moved our deep baseball draft along.... the commissioner sent an e-mail every 3 picks to the next 3 owners (up, on deck, in the hole) so everyone had a "heads up" that their pick was aproaching.

Just an idea.
98Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Oct 14, 2003, 22:36 		I sent an email to ukula many hours ago, so that isn't the issue here. I have generally been sending an email after a person has been on the clock for a couple of hours, just in case they aren't aware.
99Dave R
      Dude
      ID: 1367294
      Tue, Oct 14, 2003, 22:36 		Ukula is probably seeing Dora the Exporer again :)
102coldwater coyotes
      SuperDude
      ID: 33742418
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 00:52 		Any idea why Jamal Crawford played for 50 mins tonight? Did most of the team (and the coach) take a visit at half time to Wrigley Field?
103lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 906204
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 03:48 		Jeez, 51 minutes, I'm not sure what I think about that. Could be a good warm-up, practice but ... save some for the regular season!!
104lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 906204
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 04:56 		One odd bit of trivia, not sure what it means. With Van Exel now drafted, the Warriors were the last team to have a player from their roster selected. I think Miami was second last until Coldwater picked Odom.
105Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 07:31 		rockafellerskank - just a reminder that you are up next in the rationale thread. It's been almost 24 hours since the last post in that thread.
106rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 461124288
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 09:32 		Thanks. Will do ASAP.
107blackjackis21
      Leader
      ID: 444181610
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 11:56 		lionprideguy - please check your e-mail before you make your pick.

Thanks.
108lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 289471616
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 14:25 		Hmm ... now that my roster includes Iverson, Antoine Walker, and Ron Artest, I fear I may need to change my team name from "Net Damage" to "Rim Damage."
109Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 15:10 		If you have the time and discipline to do it, it's not a bad idea to draft your rationales as you make each pick. You can then just copy them when that turn comes.

I'm already finding it difficult to remember everything that was percolating through my mind several rounds ago (I've now made 6 picks, but have only published 2 rationales), so I'm finding it much easier to write-up a current pick vs. one from several days ago.
110Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 31649212
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 15:20 		Just a reminder that RFS is up in the draft instead of me, as I traded my 6.06 pick to him earlier...

Also, Swish & Edgar are up in the rationale thread, which is really falling behind, currently 4 rounds behind the draft... come on folks, let's try to keep it at 2-3. =-)
111ukula
      Donor
      ID: 19281511
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 15:31 		I'm hoping rfs can make his pick before 5pm otherwise I'll have to send someone two possible choices since I won't be available until 11pm.
112rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 27652109
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 15:44 		I'll pick shortly.
113Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 17:30 		Hopefully either Swish or Edgar is up late (in Europe) tonight. They are now due for the next pick, as well as the next rationale.
114Swish City
      Leader
      ID: 39252113
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 17:36 		Apologies guys, i know we are up next in both threads. Please give me half an hour to sort our next pick out, and then i'll post the rationale for Yao. I have been unable to contact Edgar today and i have been out for the last few hours also. When i last looked, there were 7 picks before we were up! I'll sort out both threads ASAP.
115Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 18:08 		Thanks for burning the midnight oil, Swish.
116Swish City
      Leader
      ID: 39252113
      Wed, Oct 15, 2003, 19:22 		Ok, i'm done. I am now officially off to bed. Please do not make 6 picks between now and tomorrow 9am GMT, you swines ;)

Edgar, can you take a look at your email ASAP.
117Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 16, 2003, 09:48 		We're blasting right along this morning! I'm a little behind in my analysis, but I'll have a pick within the hour.

The rationale thread is still lagging quite a bit. Let's see if we can pick up the pace there today. (I think rfs is currently up there - 3.02 Webber)
118rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 461124288
      Thu, Oct 16, 2003, 09:57 		I won't do my rationale right now on Jamison, but I was surprised to see him there and his 18.0+ PPG. If anyone looks at their team and wants to boost points a bit, I'd be open to trading him for a better rebounder.
119Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 16, 2003, 12:57 		21 picks in the last 24 hours. Good pace! Let's keep it up, because weekends tend to be sluggish.
120Swish and Edgar
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 16, 2003, 17:45 		We're almost five rounds behind in the draft rationale thread. Since it is already late in Europe, I inserted a place holder for the 3.04 pick. Swish &/or Edgar, send me your comments in an email tomorrow and I'll paste them in.

HoopsKlyce, please go ahead with your 3.05 Sam Cassell rationale.

Hopefully, we can pick up the pace.
121rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 27652109
      Thu, Oct 16, 2003, 18:31 		Interesting that notw many spectator comments. I was waiting for someone to blast a few of my picks (or non-picks)

122Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 16, 2003, 18:33 		Maybe nobody's paying attention.
124Mike D
      Donor
      ID: 23715270
      Thu, Oct 16, 2003, 18:40 		(Holding spot to blast RFS. Will update later....after I confirm which thread is proper to blast him in)
125rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 461124288
      Thu, Oct 16, 2003, 21:11 		Not that anyone cares and not that my crystal ball is better than anyone elses, but according to my projections through 7 rounds, here is how I'd hsow the standings based on a 12 point to 1 point for each category. I can't expound on who I think is doingbetter/worse in what category, but just raw #'s:

Rank Team Score
1 Dave R 66
2 Swish 64
3 Ukula 62
4 CC 61
5 rfs 53
6 Doug 52
7 Guru 50
8 Klyce 48
9 BJ21 46
10 Lion 45
11 Rand 40
12 pfb 37
126Dave R
      Dude
      ID: 1367294
      Thu, Oct 16, 2003, 22:05 		I like your crystal ball, RFS :)
127Astade
      ID: 214361313
      Thu, Oct 16, 2003, 22:23 		Hoops Klcye,

looks like your draft rationale for Round 3 was correct.

Stackhouse out for season opener
128lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 906204
      Thu, Oct 16, 2003, 23:20 		I'd certainly be open for more differing comments and opinions. I know I haven't always made the conventional selection myself, and the most interesting part is the dialogue and debate to hear other perspectives, from both inside the league and out. Of course, the first 2 rounds are pretty standard, there's probably more room for differing opinions once you get past these common selections.

Ouch, #10 pre-ranked? Well, I guess on the bright side maybe it means I've moved up a spot from drafting #11!
129Edgar
      Leader
      ID: 458944
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 06:11 		RFS I have made a spreadsheet myself, just haven't adapted all players stats to give an accurate prediction. So it will be a little premature to post the info. I will try to post it later on when the draft moves on.
130Slowhand
      SuperDude
      ID: 18538
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 12:16 		Just read the "Draft Rationale" thread..outstanding;thanks for your efforts and time.
131Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 12:31 		Gentlemen - if you expect to be away for an extended period over the weekend, please make arrangements to leave your pick with someone else. Leave a queue, or deputize a friend to use some judgment. We've made some good progress the past few days, and I'd like the momentum to continue.

I'd am hoping we can complete the draft by next Friday. I will be away for most of the day on Saturday (next weekend, not tomorrow), and I'd love to have this wrapped up by then. At the current pace, that is doable.
132Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 12:34 		Also, if you'd like to email me a few rounds of rationales, I can add them as your turn comes around. We are falling behind there, and I'd like to make up some ground. If I get enough, I can even start adding them now, with place holders for the missing ones.

We should be working on round 6 or 7 by now. We're still in round 3, however.
133Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 12:42 		I also keep track of pro-forma standings during the draft, based on my projections of stats. I don't put a lot of credence in them - especially my own position, since it is heavily biased - but it is an useful way to keep track of my relative strength in each category.

That said, here are my standings after 8 rounds:
1 rfs 64
2 Doug 57
3 Guru 57
4 CC 54
5 Dave R 54
6 lion 54
7 ukula 53
8 bj21 50
9 pfb 49
10 Klyce 47
11 Swish 43
12 Rand 43
134lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 289471616
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 12:42 		Nice picks coldwater ... this is about the point of each round where I start to look at who might be available for the next pick, then get disappoitned as everybody keeps taking them ahead of me!
135rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 27652109
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 12:43 		I'm going to be available all weekend for small queues as needed

Guru, I have all draft pick rationales at home. I'll send them to you tonight and you can post as you see fit.
136Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 12:46 		And here are the 8-round standings based upon RotoWire's projected stats:

1 rfs 69
2 Doug 64
3 lion 58
4 ukula 55
5 Dave R 54
6 bj21 54
7 CC 50
8 Guru 50
9 Rand 49
10 Swish 43
11 Klyce 40
12 pfb 38
137blackjackis21
      Leader
      ID: 444181610
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 12:50 		I'll be gone part of the weekend, but have made arrangements to make my picks through Dave R. via the phone. I'll try to get guru my draft rationales before I take off.
138rockafellerskank
      Leader
      ID: 27652109
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 12:57 		I know I am up. I am currently talking myself out of my selection ! I'll pick withing the next 60 minutes.

Wow, I'm surpirsed to see myself so high on those other standings, but there is a reason we play the game in cyberspace and not on paper! Also, would one think that you should be able to be #1 on ypour own ranking system since you can pick the highest rated player on your team? Ironic.
139Rand
      Donor
      ID: 364152215
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 12:58 		So far I think I like the rotowire projected stats
best, I'll just ignore the others for now;)
140Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 13:07 		rfs - I use per-game stats for my pro forma rankings, and have not adjusted for injuries. So, Webber is factored into your numbers for an entire season, which we know is not correct.

If I draft someone who I expect to miss a material amount of games, I do adjust. But I tend not to do this for players on other rosters. That certainly explains part of the reason that you look so good in my numbers.
141coldwater coyotes
      SuperDude
      ID: 57111916
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 13:30 		What does rotowire project for Kobe's year?
142Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 13:44 		RotoWire Kobe projection (last year's actual in parentheses)

76 games (82)
39.5 mpg (41.5)
28.6 ppg (30.0)
5.8 reb (6.9)
5.1 ast (5.9)
2.1 stl (2.1)
0.7 blk (0.8)
1.4 3pt (1.5)
44.1% FG% (45.1%)
86.2% FT% (84.3%)
143lionprideguy
      Sustainer
      ID: 289471616
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 16:11 		I have an honest question as we approach the later rounds. I'm a roto-style rookie, but if there are any vets that don't mind offering some insight (unless, of course, it reveals anything you don't want to):

Obviously my FG% category is in terrible shape right now, not only with Iverson and Walker but even a gunner like Van Exel and other non-shooters like Artest. In the final rounds, is worthwhile to try and shore up this category with better % shooters, or at this point would most people just write it off, realize the strengths and weaknesses of their teams, and work around it. Somebody has to be last in every category, right? So I might as well just bomb this one and keep try to get better in others. The idea being that it's no use throwing stats into a black hole that can't be saved, even if I were to add Shaq at this point, so it would be wasting efforts that could instead make a difference elsewhere. Or is there no way to be successful doing this?

No need to answer if anybody feels like this is too strategy-specific a question, I'm just trying to adjust to roto scoring and figure out its implications for myself and others that have always played fantasy ball as we try to adjust.
144Blooki@Work
      ID: 24920611
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 16:28 		I'm not the most expert Roto-player myself, but I think I can offer some advice here.

With regard to the %'s. If your earlier round picks are going to tank them, it's going to be very difficult to bring them up with late-round picks. This is because early round picks probably take many more attempts than later round picks and thus offsetting the impact of the role-players. Get my drift? So unless you have a trade in the works to replace Iverson or Walker with Shaq or Brand, I'd continue the draft totally ignoring FG%.
145Ender
      Donor
      ID: 459217
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 16:46 		It's worth noting that You don't have to finish first in a category for it to be valuable to you. Finishing next to last is still better than last and may be the 1 point that puts you over the top overall. I think it's worth keeping an eye on FG% as you make your picks and look to improve, but don't plan on fixing the problem and don't let it make you pass on a guy that could help you in multiple other categories.

Sorry to intrude. If this is out of place or not appropriate please delete it.
146Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 17, 2003, 17:54 		No intrusion, Ender. We invite comments from anyone.

Sorry for the slight draft delay, here. Everytime time I get ready to select a player I talk myself out of it. (My favorite choices all disapeared in recent picks). I'll try to work this out shortly.