| 0 |
Subject: RIHC - Retrospective
Posted by: Guru
- [330592710] Fri, Mar 12, 2004, 14:21
Now that our trade deadline has past and there's little risk to divulging our thoughts, I'd like to raise a few issues for discussion.
For League Managers:
1. What's your reaction to the first year of this league in general? Did it meet your expectations?
2. What should I consider as improvements (or at least modifications) for next year? In particular:
a) Were there additional reporting or tracking enhancements that you would have found useful?
b) Was the league configured optimally (i.e., 12 teams, 12 active players, 3 bench)?
c) If next year's league were to be expanded by 2 or 3 teams, what adjustments would be needed in the roster configuration? Would this be a good idea?
3. What have you learned over the course of this season? More critically, what would you do differently if you had to do it over - not necessarily with 20/20 statistical foresight, but in terms of general tactics or strategies?
4. If you could reverse one or two decisions you made during the draft or the season, what would they be?
For outside observers:
5. Was this league interesting? I suspect the draft was of widespread interest, but did anyone follow the regular season? If so, what was interesting to you? If not, could we have done anything to make it interesting?
I have some observations on these issues to share, but I thought I'd open it up to the rest of you first. |
| 1 | rockafellerskank
Dude
ID: 27652109
Fri, Mar 12, 2004, 14:57
|
Thanks for the recap post Guru. I'll fire off some impressions.
1) I think the league met expectations, but not necessarily exceeded them. This not meant to be a 'shot' at the league, but rather a backwards compliment to the rotoguru site. By that I mean that the league was about equally competitive as several other leagues that I have or currently am playing in; which were all spawned on this site. It was fun to play against Guru and hoopsklyce -- both first for me (well, I played in a mid-season ESPN w/ Guru in 2001? +/-). For those that have had to play in public league before, this would be a HUGE step up.
As a comparison, I played in the Dirty Dozens expert league last year. Compared to them, this was 100% better quality.
I think the RIHC site was useful for those of us in the league. Would love to see a regular standings created by "projected games played" I know there were created once in a while, but that wold certainly bea unique tool not offered in any league I know of. Like the ability to retro the standings to day(s) before.
2) I think 12 teams is optimal for a league like this. If I were to make any changes, I'd go with 16 drafted players, thus increasing the bench by 2. I'd also add 1 more DL slot (reason to be explained shortly), and I'd cut down the Util spot to 1. These changes were based on my own obseravtions of people "locking in" their starters and riding them. That's fine, but I enjoy leages where part of the strategy is to 'force' line up decisions. Perhaps a defined 2-PG,-2SG,-2SF,-2PF,2-C, 1-UT configuration would force more day to day line up mangement as well??? Or, perhaps more linup management isn't desirable by the other owners.
The reason I'd propose adding 1 more DL slot may be from personal bias, but I struggled with injuries all year. I think with the greatest percentage of your roster "active" and only 1 DL slot, it is very easy to be sitting with 'default' starters. IE starting your healthy guys and thus no decision making is necessary.
3) Other than having a crystal ball, I don't know what I'd do differently. But, I do wich that each owner would have been more vocal. I don't think it would be inreasonable to require a monthly recap/commentary by each owner.
4) In my original draft commentary, I commented that I drafted some injury risks. So, I can't blame anyone but myself that injuries hurt me. WEbber killed me with the 3rd round pick. I based this at the time ona mid December return from injury and a 3-5 game suspension. obvioulsy, I was a wee-bit off! I practically forfeited that pick. Add in some bad luck based on trades (Walker to Dallas hurting my Jamison, Rickey Davis to Bos bench, Junkyard and AD used differently in CHI) and I was in triouble early. I also wish I'd taken Dave R's offer for Webber in the first month of the season!!!!
No complaints though about bad luck. C'est La Vie. As you can see I'v continued to make moves to the end and still hold out hope of adding more points. I know some decisoions to be invited back next year are based on performance, so i may be eliminated, but if I'm considered, i'd be back in a heartbeat.
Good league Guru. Especially good job of organization. No complaints or petty difference popped up. All decisions were reasonable.
|
| 2 | Doug
Sustainer
ID: 2730280
Sat, Mar 13, 2004, 15:34
|
1) I had a total blast, this was by far the best league I was in this year, but then I expected all that, so it only met my expectations. To have exceeded them, there would have needed to have been more frequent banter between managers... not necessarily revealing strategy, but even just good-natured smack-talkin'! I think part of it is that not all of us really know all the others, and so sometimes I'm not sure how someone will take it, so I try to err on the side of caution and decorum. Also, when negotiating trades (either successfully or unsuccessfully), I almost always got substantive feedback as to why it didn't work, or what it was they wanted instead, a counter offer, etc. and that's very important to me, so I appreciate that from all my fellow managers in this league!
2a) After Jan. 1 or so, what would be more useful than a "stats as of 1 month ago" would be a "last month's stats". Maybe it could be done on a weekly basis, say, each Sunday take a snapshot of the standings, then create a "delta" from the standings 4 weeks previous. This would allow us to see if we are making up or losing ground in various categories, as well as how our opponents are doing with the same.
2b and c) I like it as-is, but am open to chage. If it were to grow, then you need to reduce active roster size by 2... maybe 3G, 3F, 2C, 2U. I would be opposed to any configuration with only 1 C required, or to growing the bench past the current 3. I'm indifferent as to adding another DL slot. The overall strategy and lineup management are what appeal to me, NOT the day-to-day stuff. For this reason (as well as one I'll outline below), I prefer to avoid using the PG/SG/SF/PF positions.
Currently we have 12 teams with 12 active and 3 bench... that's 144 active and 36 bench (180 total)... not including DL. Growing to 14 teams with 10 active 3 bench would be similar to what we have now (140 and 42... 182 total), but if we were to grow to 15 teams you'd have to cut the bench down to 2 in order to leave SOMETHING in the free agent pool (150 active and 30 bench, 180 total). I'd definitely grow the DL to 2 in that case so that someone doesn't get completely hosed by injuries. Change is exciting, it might be fun to mix things up, and there's probably no shortage of people who'd like to participate... but on the other hand, why mess with something that works? I can see it both ways.
3) Well, for me this season was an experiment with a new strategy that I came up about halfway through the draft. It seemed to work remarkably well! As noted in my post-draft analysis, I decided to completely tank assists (that part sure worked!) I didn't do quite as well in steals, blocks, or boards as I had predicted, but it was an interesting year nonetheless. Getting back to the position-specific stuff... I never would have even thought of this strategy if PG had been a required position. And I definitely prefer to have the flexibility to experiment with strategies a bit (like I did this year), because that's the part of the game I really enjoy (rather than day-to-day stuff... you guys are BRUTAL on the FA pickups!!!) =-)
4) Well, I could say taking Dirk over KG, because that would probably put me in first over Dave R, but then the rest of my draft would have been different if I had done that, so actually I think the real stinger for me was Caron Butler. That was essentially a throw-away of a 5th round pick. I was expecting him to be amongst the league leaders in steals. Ouch. I also took a gamble on Wally in the 8th round, but I thought it was a sound gamble at the time so I don't second-guess that one too much... it didn't work out, but so it goes. When healthy, he's the type of G I needed... good %s, points, boards, etc.
All-in-all a great year... and it's not over yet! Watch out, Dave! =-)
|
| 3 | Dave R
Dude
ID: 3010361110
Sat, Mar 13, 2004, 16:31
|
1) Guru, first of all I'd like to thank you for starting this league. It's been a real blast and I'm sure the participants in the RIBC will enjoy it as well. One thing that did surprise me somewhat was the limited amount of trades transacted.
2) I actually think Dougs idea of a monthly tracking of stats is a great idea, although I really don't know how difficult that would be to implement.
I'm in favor of leaving the league size as is. I would encourage an additional DL slot. I was fairly fortunate but a few had serious injury problems. I wouldn't mind a larger league with some of the adjustments talked about above.
3&4) It's really kind of difficult for me to assess what I might have done differently. The draft just seemed to fall in place, starting with KG at pick #3, and some later round picks also worked out nicely ( Dampier and JJ, to name a couple).
Actually from the outset I rotated players daily and jumped out to a huge lead in games played and had to pull in the reigns a little which might have helped a bit when Barry and Wesley were on the DL.
Doug, for sure it isn't over, but I'm hoping to hang on.
All in all, its been a great league, well organized from the git-go, but most important a great group of guys.
|
| 4 | blackjackis21
Leader
ID: 34837521
Mon, Mar 15, 2004, 12:53
|
1. I would echo Doug's comments - the league definitely met my (fairly lofty) expectations. If anything was lacking in my opinion, it was the amount of communication/comaraderie/trash talking, etc. I was as guilty of this as anyone, and am not sure what the right way to encourage more would be. Perhaps a monthly recap, as rfs suggested. Overall, I am very grateful to have been invited and hope to be back next year.
2a. I did find the "per game" standings interesting when they were calculated. Roto (vs H2H) in general, is slightly less exciting to me and the standings reports, to some extent, are what they are. Unless you're in the chase for the top spot (or potentially trying to avoid the cellar/cut list), the standings are only interesting from the standpoint of figuring out where you can potentially make some gains, which is covered by Yahoo's standard standings. That said, I do think the more traditional (slighly less luck-oriented) roto format is the right one for this type of league.
b. I think the league was indeed configured optimally. I like the 4G, 4F, 2C, 2 util, balance provided and I think 3 bench spots is also the right number. In my opinion, the free agent list had just the right amount of talent available throughout the year.
c. Expansion to 14 or 15 would be fine by me, but I would decrease the roster size, allowing for the total number of players drafted to be approximately the same as it was this year. If you wanted to maintain the generic G, F, C positions, maybe go to 3G, 3F, 1-2 C and 1-2 Util., with 3 bench? I don't like the idea of going to just 1 C required per team, but also might not like 30 C's required for the league (I had enough trouble there this year).
3. Not sure I learned too much strategy-wise. If anything, I guess my season underscored the importance of having a solid center or two. I had Theo Ratliff, but may have been better off with less of a specialist and more of an all-arounder.
4. Well certainly in hindsight, taking Kobe with the 9th pick was a mistake - though my second choice at the time (Ray Allen) would have been a bigger mistake. There are probably folks who were hit harder than I was, but between Kobe, Malone, ‘Zo, Keon Clark and Troy Hudson playing significantly less than I anticipated/hoped, I’m at least curious as to what could have been…
A couple of my bigger mistakes were dropping Voshon Lenard and Gordon Giricek early on. They’ve both put together some nice runs here and there throughout the season (seemingly at times when I could have used them). Lionprideguy did try to get me to take Lenard back, but I suppose once you’ve dropped a guy, there’s a mental discount applied.
I can’t find the thread anymore, but maybe someone could butt the one that indicated the winner of the league was required to host a pre-draft fiesta for next year? I think that would go quite a ways towards increasing the camaraderie.
Thanks for the fun all.
|
| 5 | Rand
Donor
ID: 83231216
Tue, Mar 16, 2004, 22:51
|
This league definitely met my expectations and I'm very grateful and honored to have been selected and have the chance to compete with a such an awesome group of guys. Hmmm, I guess maybe I had also expected more trading as well, but I'm pleased I was able to pull off three fairly major trades myself.
Sorry I can't really think of any adjustments or modifications but some of the previous suggestions sound interesting. I thought the league and the reports were excellent all round.
The only thing I can think of right now that I've learned is from my recent trading of Zydranus. One shouldn't trade or make changes simply for the 'fun' of trading or making changes. If it ain't broke, don't break it. Of course, Z has been totally on fire since I let him go, so that accounts for some of my bitterness:)
I think I drafted very well. Brand's early injury set me back some, and Steve Francis wasn't quite as studly as I hoped. Still, I was able to use Francis to get Ray Allen and Tony Parker so I think that was a pretty good upgrade. Obviously I'm very pleased with taking Lebron James when I did even though it seemed like somewhat of a risky play at the time.
Right now it appears that not trading my Brand for the Euros TMac was foolish, but hopefully Brand will get hot again very soon. Taking Joe Smith with the last pick of the draft turned out to be a fantastic choice. Overall, I think I've had a good season but it's gonna be a dogfight with Blackjack to win that 6th spot!
|
| 6 | Swish City
Leader
ID: 931275
Thu, Mar 18, 2004, 07:25
|
I am not speaking for Edgar, i'm sure he'll chime in with his own thoughts in due course...
1) I have thoroughly enjoyed the league this year. I expected it to be a tough, tight league and it's no surprise that it has turned out that way. To compete against some of the finest Hoops managers around has been a great experience. I have only ever played Yahoo public leagues before, so i noticed a huge difference in the ferocity of the competition. I agree with some of the other guys in that it would have been nice to see a bit more banter and trash talking, but i guess that is something that will come naturally next time around, as the league's managers become more familiar with each other. Aspects i particularly enjoyed were the draft recap and the frenetic trading period before the trade deadline.
2) I would prefer not to revert to a PG/SG/SF/PF/C configuration. I just think it's too restrictive if you get tanked by injuries or want to change strategy halfway through the season, say. For example, our strategy of overloading on specific cats would have been far more difficult if we had to have 2 SF eligible players to fill out roster games instead of being able to use 2 F/PF instead. I think 12 teams is a good size, but if the number of teams were to increase, i'd be for keeping the 2 Utility spots and reducing the active roster spots elsewhere. See the reasons illustrated above.
3&4) Strategy wise, there isn't a whole lot i would change. I think we did a pretty good job of drafting a balanced squad. If there was a problem, maybe it's that we were too balanced. Something i would think about next time out is maybe focusing a bit more on dominating certain categories than aiming for mid-good points in the majority of categories. From that point of view, i like what Doug did in tanking assists as that really seemed to help him accross the board. Draft wise, we got some fabulous value with Boozer in Round 7 and Vlade in Round 12. Our worst pick was most definitely Big Dog in Round 5, which was effectively a wasted pick.
I can definitely isolate a few key points to our season. Possibly the most important was getting Hinrich as an FA, as it allowed us to get Kenny Thomas and set us up to have a run at rebounds in the closing stretch. Grabbing Dave R's castoffs in Chandler may also prove to be crucial, as he's pretty much the kind of guy we were looking for in our frantic trading efforts to get another big man. So to get someone like him without having to go down the TMac for Brand/Jermo/Ben route, was huge for us, especially considering it only cost us Jarvis Hayes. Z for Carmelo has been big for us too so far, no doubt. Sorry about that Rand, but at least Carmelo has been looking pretty darn good too!
|
| 7 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Mar 26, 2004, 12:31
|
I never felt like I had this season under control, right from the start of the draft. Players I was looking for always seemed to be snatched up a few picks before me, and I ended up with a team that I was not particularly confident about. I was still doing OK - roughly median - when Matt Harpring was lost, and when Charlie Ward was traded, that really sank the boat. I've been pleased to be able to hover around 8th since that time.
My biggest mistake was not taking Kirilenko in the 2nd round. I had him ranked #12 statstically in my draft rankings, and he and Jason Terry were the top players on my list when my second pick was due. While I really didn't think he would slide to my third round pick, I just couldn't get comfortable that it wasn't too early to be taking him, and I think many of you would have thought it was a very aggressive pick for that time, too. This was pick #17, and I went with the "safer" pick of Terry. Kiri went #27. But as it's turned out, he's done even better than my projections, and had I taken him then, I think I'd easily be in the top half - especially since Terry is now ranked #27 by the ESPN player rater, while Kiri is #3.
A few of my draft choisces worked out well. Damon Stoudamire was a nice 10th round pick. Richard Jefferson was good for a 6th rounder. But Swift and Nesterovic have been disappointing.
Along the way, I had some good success with Etan Thomas as an early F/A pickup. More recently, I bumbled into Damon Jones just a few days before TJ Ford went down, and he has helped to resuscitate my assist ranking. But more often than not, when I turned to the F/A list for help, I didn't find much that was helpful.
In the RIBC (baseball), I decided to be a little bolder in the draft, picking desired players a little ahead of schedule rather than cutting it close. We'll see whether that worked or not. At least I start that season feeling a little more like I have a team that I wanted, rather than settling for a bunch of 2nd choices.
All told, this was the most competitive Roto Hoops league I've been in - and that is exectly what I expected. I'm disappointed in my finish, and although Harpring was a major problem to overcome, I certainly can't lay most of the blame at his knees.
Looking forward to next year!
|
| 8 | hoopsklyce
ID: 52401120
Sat, Apr 03, 2004, 19:09
|
To answer 1) and 2) I offer the following:
1) I did enjoy being in the league. The best part for me was the draft and the first weeks where everyones interest/excitement seemed very high. I found due to the deepness of the league and the game restrictions I did not need to spend much time looking for free agents. Also contributing to that was that most of my players seemed to be performing at a level to not warrant dropping. So I would say I did not spend a lot of time managing my team. That was fine with me since I don't have much spare time anyway. Perhaps I should have worked harder to improve my team through trades and I admit I did not take the time to seriously study the my standing within each category to see where I would benefit most from improving.
2) It has always been my desire to have a deep bench or have league rules that allow a team to compete as much as possible in the event of injuries. In that regard I would like to see either a deeper bench or more IL slots. Not that my team had any injury issues this season. At one point I thought the Count Drakula team had a shot a first place when they were in second despite having played far fewer games than the first place team. Looking at the CDs roster I see it has been hit hard by injuries. If there were more injury slots available I think it would allow a team like CD to have a better shot to compete despite bad luck and I don't quite see any downside to it. Perhaps someone can explain what problems there are to having more bench/IL slots. I would even like more liberal rules for qualifying for IL such as two DNPs makes the player eligible although I realize this could be hard to administer. CD has had Baron Davis and KMart not playing AND not eligible for the IL. I am sure of teams have been hurt by this situation also.
Now regarding Count Drakulas team, it appears as if the team will not max out their games played and I would like to hear from the owner about why that has happened. I realize the team has had injuries but it would seem that it is in the teams best interests to play all games. Even if it means waiving Jeff Mcinnis....even Baron Davis or KMart to get active players to maximize the teams statistical output. I look at CDs roster for last friday and see it left Corey Magettes 34 points on the bench and Jeff McInnis who is on the IL was active. I feel a league of this caliber should have all managers active to the end regardless of their standing (and I think the CD team could have won if it found that extra 50 games it will come short on). Before I go on too much I would like to hear from that owner. I also think Phiflyboy team may come up short on the games. I know the team has been out of it but everyone should play to the end.
Will offer my thoughts on 3) and 4) later.
David
|
| 9 | hoopsklyce
ID: 52401120
Sat, Apr 03, 2004, 21:26
|
I just now noticed ukula has addressed his situation on the other bulletin board...
|
| 10 | ukula
ID: 20831621
Sat, Apr 03, 2004, 22:42
|
Hoopsklyce - first of all concerning Maggette and McInnis, I really shouldn't have to explain my roster moves but I made my lineup decisions based on the following reports from RotoWorld:
Mar. 31, 2004 - 10:36 pm et
Corey Maggette had just five points in 11 minutes before departing with a strained hamstring in the first half.
He is day-to-day and is probably cuttable based on the fact they only play twice a week in the last two weeks of the season.
Mar. 30, 2004 - 11:24 pm et
Jeff McInnis missed another game with a bruised shoulder, but is expected to play in the Cavs' next game.
Wait until he proves something, but he's about to come back.
Secondly, sure I had a shot at 1st place but when your horse has an opening on the outside coming down the stretch and you go to the whip but it has nothing left in the tank there's not much you can do. You say you would have cut all of these players even though they weren't on the IL? Yeah right. Hindsight is 20/20.
Lastly, I find it rather odd that you would basically call me out for lack of effort in a "league of this caliber" when in fact you admit yourself that you could have put more effort into research and roster decisions. You are the one that has the website devoted to fantasy basketball not me. You should have been the one that wanted to improve your standing more than anybody. It's kind of like the pot calling the kettle black. You feel I owe you an explanation for why I didn't max out my games? I think you should give an explanation as to why you didn't try harder considering you charge people money for your advice.
|
| 11 | hoopsklyce
Leader
ID: 59923214
Sun, Apr 04, 2004, 14:23
|
Ukula,
With Sanforders impressive victory your team has more incentive than any other to play it out since if you are caught by RotoGuru you would not be invited back. I encourage you to run out the pop fly.
David
|
| 12 | hoopsklyce
ID: 52401120
Tue, Apr 06, 2004, 21:39
|
follow -up to 2)
I would enjoy an deeper league - say 3 more teams
I would suggest 2 IL slots in lieu of 1
It would be nice if Yahoo had more features for looking for free agents in particular recent 15 day averages like ESPN has
3) The one thing to do differently would have been to strike a deal to improve steals. Had extensive trades discussions with Net Damage but could only find chemistry for a minor deal. Though doubtful trades could have been enough to catch the leader Sanforders since most likely what I would have gained in steals would have lost elsewhere.
4) Two decisions to reverse in draft was Shaq at one. Did not like the number 5 spot to pick since at the time I thought after TMac, KG, Duncan, and Dirk there was a drop off. But I over valued the C pos and Shaqs 12% drop in FT from last year really hurt. The other decision I regreet was that I should not have given up on Darrell Armstrong so quickly. He had strengths in steals and treys that my team really needed.
Other - Picks 6-9 is a time where you can often get a player who performs much better than projected in the preseason. I did OK with Stephen Jackson at 9 but Drew Gooden was a player at 7 who really fell short of my expectations. I think Guru had a similar experience with Bonzi who I got burned with in another league.
Skimming through the draft summary it seems Swish and Edgar did real well with these picks with Melo, Boozer, and Manu. Other nice picks in this range were Brad Miller, Zach Randolph, and Ron Artest. I am sure I missed a couple others too.
Round 2 and 3 picks that did real well included Stojokavich, Baron D (was putting up some sick numbers [outside of %] until he realized he should be hurt like eveyone else on Ukula's team), Kirilenko, and Cassell (my guy).
My second round pick Rahim has averaged less than 24 mpg since being traded to Portland a couple months ago and the only reason I did not waive him was because of who he is. He has been riding my bench.
I did OK with some FA centers including Ostertag and Dalembert who helped my team to be a leader in blocks after my preseason projections had me low.
I will put up one last post after the season is over (and since I have not done my research yet) on the comparison between Manu and Wade. We had an early season speculation as to who would do better. It is my feeling they were similar but since Wade missed many games with injury Manus totals may be superior. what the heck let me do it now using espn...
based on averages
Manu ranks 62
Wade ranks 64
based on totals
Manu ranks 59
Wade ranks 95
not sure how many games each has left
well -thats probably enought - see you next year
|
| 13 | lionprideguy
Sustainer
ID: 906204
Fri, Apr 16, 2004, 03:33
|
Sorry for running late here but to throw in my input:
First and most important of all, thanks to Guru and all the other managers for a great season! Every time I thought I had things a bit more figured out, they only got harder and I seemed to drop even more! I don't think I've had a more enjoyable time getting beat up on, though.
1) Even more than meeting my expectations, I would say this season's competition exceeded them. I knew it was going to be a big challange, but maintaining any positions got even harder as the season went on. Everybody was so on top of things that you couldn't fall asleep for even a few days or you might miss out on opportunities, which is great for competitiveness. I agree the RIHC discussion thread was a little quieter during the season than I had expected, and in fact because of that I stopped checking the site as regularly (and hence missed this thread when it initially came around, sorry). But I do agree it's likely because we didn't know each other personally, and so I know I would also err on the side of caution, not wanting to say something in jest that could have been taken the wrong way. A seemingly cheesy, but possibly effective, way to solve this would have been asking each manager to fill out a quick bio for the league if they felt okay with it - who they are, what they do, who their favorite teams are, etc. I know I would have been open to people joking with me about being a Sacramento Kings fan living in LA or the ongoing struggles of my university (Loyola Marymount) to recover from the effects of the death of Hank Gathers 14 years ago, and the legacy he, Bo, Jeff Fryer, and the others left at LMU.
2) I don't think I can provide any recommendations for improvements in setup, although I'll defer to people who have had more than just one year of experience in this type of league. I know the free agent pool was really thin after January or so to be able to find any players who could help a team, so once a team fell behind in a category it made it even harder to dig out of the hole. Although I'd love to add 2 or 3 teams to the league to try and find a way to slip back in even after such a poor finish :), I think that would make it even harder to find contributing players. Whether it's eliminating a bench spot, or a utility, or something else, I'd like to find a way to throw a few more contributing players back to the free agent pool to allow lower teams a chance to recover.
3) What would I do differently? Well, three big lessons here:
A) I never realized I had dug myself such a big hole in games played. I didn't realize it would be so hard to make them up later, and I was too conservative early on in starting guys. When I realized this around mid-march, it was way too late to make it up and you just can't leave that many games on the table.
B) It wasn't until after the first few days that I realized how valuable the waiver wire/free agent pool was. After the draft, I didn't even think about making roster changes after that and missed out picking up guys that were solid contributors throughout the season, such as Jim Jackson, and spent half the year trying to trade for guys I missed out on like Ostertag.
C) I wouldn't have been so conservative on trading. I was too hesitant the first few months because the new format, where once I traded a guy I couldn't just buy him back, made me wary of taking a chance on some good deals. Hoopsklyce, Doug, Rand, and some others made some good offers during the season that I probably should have taken, and I feel bad if I was frustrating for not pulling the trigger for them more often. Heck, Hoopsklyce put up with ongoing talks for nearly two months just to make the Barbosa-for-Gooden trade - you'd think after that much time I could have come up with something more substantial for him!
4) Only two decisions? Haha - well, I think the biggest, even if he never got injured during the season, was drafting Iverson #14 overall. I really went back and forth on this one, and even typed in Ben Wallace's name on the draft board before changing it. This set the precedent for the rest of the draft for me. With Iverson, I decided to scrap the FG% category altogether, the theme that led to the later Antoine Walker trade and drafting of guys like Darius Miles and Nick Van Exel (heck, if Iverson is going to drag down the FG%, why not do it in style?). If I had taken Wallace, I would have been set at center for the year with him and Jermaine O'Neal, and would have built a more balanced team that wouldn't have included the aforementioned players, and been more cautious of FG and FT%. That pick set the strategy for the rest of the draft for me, and a roster overhaul during the season after all that was set was just too big a task.
Thanks again to everybody, I'll look forward to watching the new RIHC competition next year, unfortunately from the outside, and hopefully will get a chance with a qualifier league to earn my way back!
|
| 14 | Edgar
Leader
ID: 458944
Fri, Apr 16, 2004, 04:23
|
Allright, finally my post. Took me a while but now I have found the time to write something.
First of all I think this league was great. The rules of the scoring make the game very interesting to play on a daily basis and the other managers are all top of the bill. And not afraid to make moves, which I regard as a big plus as well. I really appreciate Guru sending out us Euro's an invitation and thank him for organising this league. The league also enabled me to play together with Swish City which I enjoyed as well. Even though he thought Scotland would stand a chance against Holland in the euro 2004 qualifying match.........But on the Yahoo front he has made some sound decisions like picking up Hinrich early.
On the league set up I think the number of teams and players per team are very good. It was very hard to find good free agents but they were available if you looked hard. The reporting on the league was fine. No recommendations here. I do think however some teams were hit by injuries really hard. I know this is part of the game but maybe another IL slot would help out to enable these teams to compete better. The small FA pool makes injuries even harder to cope with. As said earlies, expansion does not seem like a good idea, 12 teams is a good number.
Things to do differently next year is to watch the FA pool more closely and switching early. Sometimes we waited maybe a little too long. On the other hand it is also smart in the draft to make some stable/ low risk picks. For example pick players that have proven their value for their team and have a good track record on not getting injured (I realise Iverson falls in this cat but he kind of let LPG down this year......).
Mistakes hmmm, this is real easy. Biggest mistake was obviously to pick up Amare instead of Baron Davis, who I (where did I hear this earlier) already put in the box. Not that I think that Amare sucked, he was fine when not injured. Just that Baron really blew up especially in the first half of the season. It would have given us a head start.
My 2 cents, hope to be back next year.
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|