Page 4 of 5
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2022 4:38 pm
by Craig
UOducksTK1 wrote:Craig wrote:UOducksTK1 wrote:jibbajabba614 wrote:lukeyrid13 wrote:offtheheezy wrote:Baron Davis be disrespected by these ratings and notes
Matrix as well.
Both look super mediocre.
To be fair I had Baron as B- B- B- B- C B
And then people complained about rating inflation.
Damned if you do damned if you don’t
I don't think rating inflation is going to be fixed in the drafts. It can't be, and it would negatively effect everyone with picks moving forward.
A solution for inflation is beyond drafts. So you do you.
Spoken like someone planning to pick at the top of the draft for a while
Why would starting at the draft files not be helpful?
If you adjust draft files, you won't see even a slight impact for at least 4-5 seasons where there's a solid 20% of newly adjusted player ratings in the league. Probably a solid 8 seasons or so before it makes a big difference.
Additionally, it'll have a negative effect on drafting and trading. No one will want to trade for picks, which will significantly hurt draft picks. Additionally, it gives unfair advantage to teams with good players currently and no future picks. That would be a bigger problem than the inflation problem we have.
Ok but if you employ your other idea of adjusting the current players for an immediate impact and then tone down draft files to try & help it be more sustainable moving forward, doesn't that hit on both fronts?
I dunno I'm just dumb I guess, I'll leave it alone.
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2022 4:38 pm
by Briezy
jibbajabba614 wrote:I had Wally #2 on my list. I’d be a hypocrite to not get him for a mid teen pick
My roster is basically empty. I can afford to wait on these guys to pan out so the more shots I can take in this unpredictable draft the better lol. Hopefully we both get what we wanted.
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2022 4:46 pm
by UOducksTK1
Craig wrote:
Ok but if you employ your other idea of adjusting the current players for an immediate impact and then tone down draft files to try & help it be more sustainable moving forward, doesn't that hit on both fronts?
I dunno I'm just dumb I guess, I'll leave it alone.
Well yes of course if you did both. But I jibba felt pressured to adjust draft files now without any adjustments to players currently in the league.
You’re not dumb Craig, you’re above average for sure.
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2022 5:44 pm
by UOducksTK1
I’m shopping my pick to a few GMs, so just waiting on responses.
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2022 8:08 pm
by jibbajabba614
Had a chance to read the whole discussion.
Honestly we should implement all these ideas for 3.0…
I personally think we should stop maybe in 2030. I think last time we played til 2040. It would be nice to go longer but by 2030 it was majority fake players.
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2022 8:11 pm
by pistolpetejr
jibbajabba614 wrote:Had a chance to read the whole discussion.
Honestly we should implement all these ideas for 3.0…
I personally think we should stop maybe in 2030. I think last time we played til 2040. It would be nice to go longer but by 2030 it was majority fake players.
Fully agree about resetting earlier than last time.
It was part of the reason I left. It got quite boring after the Ingram-AD-Kawhi trio I had won like 6 chips total or something lol
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2022 8:14 pm
by lukeyrid13
^ I agree on ending earlier
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2022 8:17 pm
by jibbajabba614
We could start earlier. I know it 1970 it was like 15 teams. But I’m pretty good at researching. Start from 1970 NBA/ABA players and work from college… might be fun to have Kareem in his prime and Bill Russell at his decline
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2022 7:37 am
by bellsduck
jibbajabba614 wrote:We could start earlier. I know it 1970 it was like 15 teams. But I’m pretty good at researching. Start from 1970 NBA/ABA players and work from college… might be fun to have Kareem in his prime and Bill Russell at his decline
That would be awesome
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2022 9:33 am
by UOducksTK1
jibbajabba614 wrote:We could start earlier. I know it 1970 it was like 15 teams. But I’m pretty good at researching. Start from 1970 NBA/ABA players and work from college… might be fun to have Kareem in his prime and Bill Russell at his decline
I think starting as early as possible would be super fun. And if we started say 1970, we could combine some guys from 50s/60s to fill out players.
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2022 9:36 am
by pistolpetejr
UOducksTK1 wrote:jibbajabba614 wrote:We could start earlier. I know it 1970 it was like 15 teams. But I’m pretty good at researching. Start from 1970 NBA/ABA players and work from college… might be fun to have Kareem in his prime and Bill Russell at his decline
I think starting as early as possible would be super fun. And if we started say 1970, we could combine some guys from 50s/60s to fill out players.
I think the idea of bringing in 50s/60s into the 70s would be a ton of fun, way more fun than just starting with 1970. Mikan, Russell, Cousy, Pettit, Schayes, West, Baylor, etc. So much fun.
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2022 9:42 am
by Marzeial
Yeah I do like the idea of the older players. Not only does it make you appreciate them but also know them a little more
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2022 10:51 am
by UOducksTK1
Yeah older would be fun. But still got 30 seasons to focus on here. I need a couple more rings. And a better lotto system
.
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2022 10:54 am
by jibbajabba614
Slowest draft all time…
Given GM’s looking at moves
Re: 1999 Draft Discussion
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2022 11:15 am
by lukeyrid13
UOducksTK1 wrote:Yeah older would be fun. But still got 30 seasons to focus on here. I need a couple more rings. And a better lotto system
.
Same