PDA

View Full Version : 2018 NBA All-Time ReDraft Sign-Ups!



valade16
04-09-2018, 07:48 PM
Everybody it's that time again!

After 2 years, we are doing an NBA All-Time Redraft! What is an All-Time Redraft?

An All-Time Redraft is a snake style draft of all the players throughout NBA history. The goal is to construct the best team, make the playoffs, and win the Championship!

If you would like to play, please list the post in the thread with the following information:

Have you ever played before?
Would you like a Co-Manager?
What rules would you like/not like to see?


Let's get it!!

mightybosstone
04-09-2018, 10:47 PM
I would love to do this, but I'm about to be gone for a week and a half on a vacation in Europe, and I won't be back until late April. I'll happily contribute as a consultant to somebody, though.

valade16
04-10-2018, 12:07 AM
I would love to do this, but I'm about to be gone for a week and a half on a vacation in Europe, and I won't be back until late April. I'll happily contribute as a consultant to somebody, though.

We won't be starting until Late April :)

GREATNESS ONE
04-10-2018, 10:59 AM
I’m in V
Yea, done it before
I don’t mind a CO

mightybosstone
04-10-2018, 11:22 AM
We won't be starting until Late April :)

All right. I'm in for my own team as long as the draft starts no earlier than April 24th. I come back the night of the 23rd. I do not require a co-manager.

valade16
04-10-2018, 11:50 AM
All right. I'm in for my own team as long as the draft starts no earlier than April 24th. I come back the night of the 23rd. I do not require a co-manager.

Done!

Shammy is in the same boat. He will be playing but won't be available until the end of April I believe.

PatsSoxKnicks
04-10-2018, 05:03 PM
Like MBT, am really busy over the next few weeks but would love to do it if it's in late April. Also, will probably need a Co.

valade16
04-10-2018, 05:05 PM
Like MBT, am really busy over the next few weeks but would love to do it if it's in late April. Also, will probably need a Co.

It will start in late April. I think we can make a Co work!

mngopher35
04-10-2018, 05:25 PM
I have done a bunch of games but not sure about a ATRD tbh, think it's the first
Prefer no co

Late April works for me

Raidaz4Life
04-10-2018, 06:26 PM
I'm in
No Co
1 starter with peak year prior to Magic Johnson being drafted

Jeffy25
04-10-2018, 06:33 PM
Count me in

NYKalltheway
04-10-2018, 06:56 PM
I'll sign up but if there's too many participants you can put me on a waiting list because I can't be sure if I can be fully active due to time zones. It usually isn't a problem as long as lists are sent.

No cogm.

Rules?
I'd want to see this something like this:
12 man roster and only one player for each 'prime zone of 5 years'. Meaning 1963-1968, 1968-1973, 1973-1978 up to 2013-2018. That makes it 12. Doubt anyone will pick Mikan or Pettit anyway but I guess the first two categories can be 1948-1958 and 1958-1968 or something. That makes things harder but it still doesn't limit you much as most great players have had their primes in transitional periods. And the rule could be that a player has to have at least 2 or 3 prime years in that time period.

Just to make things tougher and ensure that everyone is playing on equal terms as the decade splits are too vague and can be easily worked around and to of course cancel any modern day bias.

KnicksorBust
04-10-2018, 07:02 PM
I'll sign up but if there's too many participants you can put me on a waiting list because I can't be sure if I can be fully active due to time zones. It usually isn't a problem as long as lists are sent.

No cogm.

Rules?
I'd want to see this something like this:
12 man roster and only one player for each 'prime zone of 5 years'. Meaning 1963-1968, 1968-1973, 1973-1978 up to 2013-2018. That makes it 12. Doubt anyone will pick Mikan or Pettit anyway but I guess the first two categories can be 1948-1958 and 1958-1968 or something. That makes things harder but it still doesn't limit you much as most great players have had their primes in transitional periods. And the rule could be that a player has to have at least 2 or 3 prime years in that time period.

Just to make things tougher and ensure that everyone is playing on equal terms as the decade splits are too vague and can be easily worked around and to of course cancel any modern day bias.

I am also curious what you were thinking for rules. :)

valade16
04-10-2018, 07:06 PM
I am also curious what you were thinking for rules. :)

So far it is going to be a traditional ATRD since we haven't had the original version in 2 years (last one in 2016).

I was going to incorporate the Jordan rule, and have eras restrictions so people can't load up on current players. A player has to have been in the NBA 5 years to be eligible (including this year) (which would allow Gobert and Giannis to be eligible) and I'm leaning towards a 3 year peak, but I've heard a lot of interest in a 1 year peak.

I'm flexible on the era restrictions and balancing it out between too restrictive vs allowing people to start 5 post-00's players.

Capnwalnuts42
04-10-2018, 07:21 PM
Hey Nick, I'm in.
I've played once before.
I'd prefer to manage myself.

Lakers + Giants
04-10-2018, 08:10 PM
Yes.
Hell No.
Any idc.

AI
04-10-2018, 10:07 PM
In

GREATNESS ONE
04-10-2018, 10:08 PM
Yes.
Hell No.
Any idc.

We should've kept Curry & Shaq! lol

Raps18-19 Champ
04-10-2018, 10:49 PM
I'm in if there is no Jordan.

valade16
04-10-2018, 11:00 PM
I'm in if there is no Jordan.

We will likely be playing with Jordan however the "MJ Rule" will apply (if you are unfamiliar, instead of picking at the top of the 3rd in the snaked draft, the team that drafts MJ will pick in the bottom of the 2nd and the bottom of the 3rd rounds so they would essentially pick MJ, bottom 2nd, bottom 3rd, bottom 4th, top 5th).

I don't think a team has ever won with MJ under the Jordan rule, in fact most struggle to make the playoffs.

Raps18-19 Champ
04-10-2018, 11:07 PM
We will likely be playing with Jordan however the "MJ Rule" will apply (if you are unfamiliar, instead of picking at the top of the 3rd in the snaked draft, the team that drafts MJ will pick in the bottom of the 2nd and the bottom of the 3rd rounds so they would essentially pick MJ, bottom 2nd, bottom 3rd, bottom 4th, top 5th).

I don't think a team has ever won with MJ under the Jordan rule, in fact most struggle to make the playoffs.

Yea, but the guys who had the 1st pick have luckily been idiots. Every year in the chatzy after round 5, we always try to reconstruct a Jordan team and many guys come up with contending teams. I guess I'll still play (assuming I can agree to other rules) hoping I get #1 then but I would prefer not to.

But how will you handle eras? I don't want to be stuck in a situation where players have to play X amount of minutes in the same position. I had Melo last year and Ebbs had that rule (in the No MVP redraft) where I had to play starters 24 mins (but at the same position) so I had to play him 24 minutes minimum at SF and 8 mins at PF when I wanted to split his minutes like 16 and 16 at PF/SF. Pretty sure the rule changed mid draft and I wasn't too thrilled.

valade16
04-10-2018, 11:24 PM
Yea, but the guys who had the 1st pick have luckily been idiots. Every year in the chatzy after round 5, we always try to reconstruct a Jordan team and many guys come up with contending teams. I guess I'll still play (assuming I can agree to other rules) hoping I get #1 then but I would prefer not to.

But how will you handle eras? I don't want to be stuck in a situation where players have to play X amount of minutes in the same position. I had Melo last year and Ebbs had that rule (in the No MVP redraft) where I had to play starters 24 mins (but at the same position) so I had to play him 24 minutes minimum at SF and 8 mins at PF when I wanted to split his minutes like 16 and 16 at PF/SF. Pretty sure the rule changed mid draft and I wasn't too thrilled.

I will work out a rule concerning your second concern. I will have some era restrictions (mainly to prevent people from getting teams of all 00's players), but it won't be overly restrictive. When it comes to minutes, I will allow exceptions for situations such as splitting evenly minutes for a hybrid player. The intent of the minute restrictions is to keep someone from playing their older guy 5 mins as a starter then benching him. If I feel anyone is violating the spirit of the game, that's when I'd enforce a minute restriction.

Raps18-19 Champ
04-10-2018, 11:38 PM
I will work out a rule concerning your second concern. I will have some era restrictions (mainly to prevent people from getting teams of all 00's players), but it won't be overly restrictive. When it comes to minutes, I will allow exceptions for situations such as splitting evenly minutes for a hybrid player. The intent of the minute restrictions is to keep someone from playing their older guy 5 mins as a starter then benching him. If I feel anyone is violating the spirit of the game, that's when I'd enforce a minute restriction.

That's kinda the thing, I would really want it written in advance, even if it is harsher.

I would suggest having a minutes restriction for starters of say like 28 minutes (which is a pretty good amount of minutes) regardless of era, but a guy needs to play at minimum like 50% of his minutes at his starting position. Someone who drafts Durant is going to play him like 36 minutes but will definitely split his minutes at PF and SF. So he needs to play at least 18 minutes at SF if he's starting there.

Or if I have a big man rotation of Unseld, Dirk and Marc. Obviously Unseld is the flexible guy here and would run like:

C- Unseld (16), Marc (32)
PF- Nowitzki (36), Unseld (12)

But under Ebbs rules of 24 minutes at the starting spot, my rotation would have had to be the below so Unseld meets the minimum 24 minutes:

C- Unseld (28), Marc (20)
PF- Nowitzki (36), March (12)

That game, I had to play majority of Noah's minutes at PF and Oakley's at C to meet the decade restrictions, even though we all know Noah should play majority of minutes at C and Oakley at PF.

GREATNESS ONE
04-10-2018, 11:58 PM
Can we start picking names? lolz

Dunkapolooza
04-11-2018, 04:41 AM
I'm in. Would prefer no co.

Dunkapolooza
04-11-2018, 04:45 AM
I don't understand the at position element. So what if you start a player at pf for 5 min but he plays 28 over all. That just means you want a certain unit on the floor at a certain time in the game. Their contribution to the team is still the same sized load right?

Redrum187
04-11-2018, 07:13 AM
I'll do it. Could we make this an auction ATRD? I think that was a lot of fun and the most fair way.

mightybosstone
04-11-2018, 08:38 AM
I will work out a rule concerning your second concern. I will have some era restrictions (mainly to prevent people from getting teams of all 00's players), but it won't be overly restrictive. When it comes to minutes, I will allow exceptions for situations such as splitting evenly minutes for a hybrid player. The intent of the minute restrictions is to keep someone from playing their older guy 5 mins as a starter then benching him. If I feel anyone is violating the spirit of the game, that's when I'd enforce a minute restriction.

I was thinking about this, and I think it would be great if we just implemented a rule preventing teams from stacking up on 2000s and 2010s players. What if it you couldn't have more than three players in your starting roster who started their careers prior to the 1994-95 season? That would still allow a ton of flexibility with players from that era while still giving more value to guys from the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s.

And if you wanted to give more emphasis to guys from the 60s, 70s and 80s, you could add a rule suggesting you have to have one starter whose career ended no later than the 94-95 season.

Mr. Baller
04-11-2018, 09:31 AM
In. Might need a co. Will let you know.

Raps18-19 Champ
04-11-2018, 09:33 AM
Im not playing if this is an auction

valade16
04-11-2018, 11:27 AM
I'll do it. Could we make this an auction ATRD? I think that was a lot of fun and the most fair way.

We haven’t done the classic re-draft in 2 years (the last 2 have been auctions), so we’re bringing it back. The one after this may be an auction.

GREATNESS ONE
04-11-2018, 11:51 AM
How many teams are you looking for?

valade16
04-11-2018, 12:03 PM
How many teams are you looking for?

Ideally 25 but at least 20 or more. I’d sacrifice quantity in exchange for more active posters.

We have 14/15 teams currently.

GREATNESS ONE
04-11-2018, 12:20 PM
Ok I’ll ask some guys who I think would be good active posters

ChiSox219
04-11-2018, 02:16 PM
I'm interested but the more rules and restrictions the less appealing imo. 3 year peak and some penalty for drafting MJ seems appropriate.

IKnowHoops
04-11-2018, 03:26 PM
Im defininitely in this

mightybosstone
04-11-2018, 03:31 PM
I'm interested but the more rules and restrictions the less appealing imo. 3 year peak and some penalty for drafting MJ seems appropriate.

Honestly, I'd kind of like to kill the whole "peak" conversation altogether. I think it's extremely limiting. If I draft Ray Allen, for example, then I should get credit for both his peak level of production and that clutch gene he showed later in this career. Why should I have to pick between the two if they're both the same player?

valade16
04-11-2018, 03:32 PM
I'm interested but the more rules and restrictions the less appealing imo. 3 year peak and some penalty for drafting MJ seems appropriate.

There won't be a lot of complicated rules nor will they be unduly strict.

KnicksorBust
04-11-2018, 04:39 PM
I am also curious what you were thinking for rules. :)

So far it is going to be a traditional ATRD since we haven't had the original version in 2 years (last one in 2016).

I was going to incorporate the Jordan rule, and have eras restrictions so people can't load up on current players. A player has to have been in the NBA 5 years to be eligible (including this year) (which would allow Gobert and Giannis to be eligible) and I'm leaning towards a 3 year peak, but I've heard a lot of interest in a 1 year peak.

I'm flexible on the era restrictions and balancing it out between too restrictive vs allowing people to start 5 post-00's players.

I like 1 year peak. I think with the polls we just had it makes it very interesting to see how that impacts someone like Bill Russell getting drafted. Is it possible he slides out of the 1st round? Lot of people talk a big game about him but never seen anyone come close to winning one of these with him. Could be wrong. Anyone?

ChiSox219
04-11-2018, 05:53 PM
I dont even know that number of peak years really matter, people are gonna judge on their own criteria anyway. If you're drafting Isaiah Thomas, his one year peak compares well with far superior players but I doubt he'd be considered at that level even if we specify one year peak.

ChiSox219
04-11-2018, 05:55 PM
I like 1 year peak. I think with the polls we just had it makes it very interesting to see how that impacts someone like Bill Russell getting drafted. Is it possible he slides out of the 1st round? Lot of people talk a big game about him but never seen anyone come close to winning one of these with him. Could be wrong. Anyone?

Yep im definitely interested to see how the draft compares to the rankings. I used to be able to get Dirk and Walton together at the end of the first/top of the second now it seems both could go top 20.

Russell in the late 20s would be a sweet building block

mightybosstone
04-11-2018, 06:20 PM
I like 1 year peak. I think with the polls we just had it makes it very interesting to see how that impacts someone like Bill Russell getting drafted. Is it possible he slides out of the 1st round? Lot of people talk a big game about him but never seen anyone come close to winning one of these with him. Could be wrong. Anyone?

I loathe 1-year peaks in this game. It gives way too much value to guys who don't deserve it and kills the value of guys who were damn good over a long period of time. In a historical game like this, 1-year peaks kind of completely change the scope of the game. Also, we JUST did a 1-year peak last year. I'd much prefer going back to something a little broader.

unleashthebeast
04-11-2018, 07:39 PM
I’m in

valade16
04-11-2018, 08:22 PM
Yep im definitely interested to see how the draft compares to the rankings. I used to be able to get Dirk and Walton together at the end of the first/top of the second now it seems both could go top 20.

Russell in the late 20s would be a sweet building block

So you’re gonna play lol?

Raps18-19 Champ
04-11-2018, 08:33 PM
Don't like 1 year peaks. A ton of players are great because of consistency. We should at least reward that. Otherwise, a guy like Parish slips to like the 7th round.

Not like people follow peaks much anyway. I've seen the argument that "Jason Kidd ranks high on the NBA 3 point list" even though he was terrible during his prime like every year. Or people using Bosh's numbers from Toronto while arguing he was a stretch 4 even though he was only making 3s and playing good defense during Miami.

ChiSox219
04-11-2018, 09:05 PM
So you’re gonna play lol?

Ya I think so but I definitely want to see how the rules shake out

valade16
04-11-2018, 09:20 PM
I loathe 1-year peaks in this game. It gives way too much value to guys who don't deserve it and kills the value of guys who were damn good over a long period of time. In a historical game like this, 1-year peaks kind of completely change the scope of the game. Also, we JUST did a 1-year peak last year. I'd much prefer going back to something a little broader.


Don't like 1 year peaks. A ton of players are great because of consistency. We should at least reward that. Otherwise, a guy like Parish slips to like the 7th round.

Not like people follow peaks much anyway. I've seen the argument that "Jason Kidd ranks high on the NBA 3 point list" even though he was terrible during his prime like every year. Or people using Bosh's numbers from Toronto while arguing he was a stretch 4 even though he was only making 3s and playing good defense during Miami.

This is why I think a 3 year peak is a good compromise. A 5 year peak hurts guys like Walton, Penny, Rose, or new players but again a 1 year peak punishes guys who had some sustained excellence.

valade16
04-11-2018, 09:21 PM
Ya I think so but I definitely want to see how the rules shake out

Excellent, since we are waiting until late April to start, I'll be setting up the Sub-Forum and I'll post the rules and have a period where people can identify rules that may be problematic and vote on how we want it.

Raps18-19 Champ
04-11-2018, 10:33 PM
I will play depending on the rules.

NYKalltheway
04-12-2018, 02:15 AM
I don't think anyone who's voting here cares about the peaks. Neither should the participants, who are also probably in a minority on this one.

Shammyguy3
04-12-2018, 11:42 AM
Cant wait! I am back from a vacation April 28th.


I have a suggestion: only draft players based on their POST SEASON performances. When it matters most. Whether its their rookie year or 16th season, post season production against (typically) superior teams is what we should be voting on anyway. Do away with the one year or 3 year peaks. And just vote based on how they played in the playoffs.

Vee-Rex
04-12-2018, 12:50 PM
I'll join!

Edit:

Never played before
No co-manager
Not sure what the rules are like

mightybosstone
04-12-2018, 02:13 PM
Cant wait! I am back from a vacation April 28th.


I have a suggestion: only draft players based on their POST SEASON performances. When it matters most. Whether its their rookie year or 16th season, post season production against (typically) superior teams is what we should be voting on anyway. Do away with the one year or 3 year peaks. And just vote based on how they played in the playoffs.

Mmm... But then you're going to completely kill the usefulness of a LOT of all-time great players: Baylor, Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, Gervin, Wilkins, McGrady, Paul, Webber, Harden, VC, etc. Also, I think framing the game this way could be super hard to judge and would be really ambiguous. Take someone like Barkley. Chuck had great postseason numbers, but won't people just care about the fact that he didn't win a ring?

NYKalltheway
04-12-2018, 02:43 PM
If you want to do peaks etc, I'll suggest this.

Draft a player and have his age next to him, eg Michael Jordan, age 28. Each player had a different peak anyway and if you want to add a special restriction, make sure you have at least 3 players over 30 or something in your 12 man roster.

GREATNESS ONE
04-12-2018, 06:12 PM
No peaks! Just write ups :nods:

Jeffy25
04-12-2018, 06:28 PM
I'll join!

Edit:

Never played before
No co-manager
Not sure what the rules are like

All of this for me btw

Raps18-19 Champ
04-12-2018, 07:30 PM
Cant wait! I am back from a vacation April 28th.


I have a suggestion: only draft players based on their POST SEASON performances. When it matters most. Whether its their rookie year or 16th season, post season production against (typically) superior teams is what we should be voting on anyway. Do away with the one year or 3 year peaks. And just vote based on how they played in the playoffs.

Not fair for the players who don't get a chance to go to the postseason, even though it's not their fault.

Shammyguy3
04-12-2018, 07:37 PM
Not fair for the players who don't get a chance to go to the postseason, even though it's not their fault.

Name an all time great (i.e. a top 100 player) that hasnt played in the post season

Additionally- is it a players fault they have a short peak due to injuries? Like Walton. We use a short peak, its not fair to Kobe or Stockton. We use a long peak, its not fair to Walton and Rose and Penny. Either way it will favor some over others. I judt just prefer to favor the games that matter

Shammyguy3
04-12-2018, 07:41 PM
Mmm... But then you're going to completely kill the usefulness of a LOT of all-time great players: Baylor, Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, Gervin, Wilkins, McGrady, Paul, Webber, Harden, VC, etc. Also, I think framing the game this way could be super hard to judge and would be really ambiguous. Take someone like Barkley. Chuck had great postseason numbers, but won't people just care about the fact that he didn't win a ring?

Its a team sport. Barkley did his duty, most of his teams lost despite his greatness. Unlike Robinson who **** the bed regularly. Webber. Etc.

valade16
04-12-2018, 07:52 PM
While I enjoy the debate, I think a lot of our fretting over how exactly we judge these players is a little moot since the majority of people have their own preconceived criteria for judging each player.

Raps18-19 Champ
04-12-2018, 08:06 PM
Name an all time great (i.e. a top 100 player) that hasnt played in the post season

Additionally- is it a players fault they have a short peak due to injuries? Like Walton. We use a short peak, its not fair to Kobe or Stockton. We use a long peak, its not fair to Walton and Rose and Penny. Either way it will favor some over others. I judt just prefer to favor the games that matter

Meant "doesn't get a chance to go to the postseason (on a regular basis)".

Some guys barely make the playoffs and some don't get far despite being a great player.

Shammyguy3
04-12-2018, 08:31 PM
Meant "doesn't get a chance to go to the postseason (on a regular basis)".

Some guys barely make the playoffs and some don't get far despite being a great player.

Again, which player that will substantially sway votes hasn't played regularly in the playoffs?

Capnwalnuts42
04-12-2018, 08:36 PM
I don't mind waiting until late April to do this, but can we set the draft order ASAP? I'd like to set up my draft board and prep as soon as I can.

Also, I implore those playing to do their due diligence before voting, and at least refer to roster pages before voting. I must have spent 8 hours constructing my roster page with statistical calculations and hyperlinks to highlight videos and probasketballreference pages last season, only to find out nobody had even referenced it before they voted. I know I can't make non players to commit to this, but I like to think those playing should be held to a higher standard of research. Lol.

GREATNESS ONE
04-13-2018, 12:39 AM
If you ever won any of these re-drafts, you should be at the bottom of the 1st round pick order, or at least not top 10.

GREATNESS ONE
04-13-2018, 12:42 AM
I don't mind waiting until late April to do this, but can we set the draft order ASAP? I'd like to set up my draft board and prep as soon as I can.

Also, I implore those playing to do their due diligence before voting, and at least refer to roster pages before voting. I must have spent 8 hours constructing my roster page with statistical calculations and hyperlinks to highlight videos and probasketballreference pages last season, only to find out nobody had even referenced it before they voted. I know I can't make non players to commit to this, but I like to think those playing should be held to a higher standard of research. Lol.

I get the second part because I feel like I was victim to it but opposite, I am a very busy man. So constructing 8hours is not going to happen but putting together the best team I know I have, but yet because guys think the other guy constructed "8h" of work thy didn't even give teams a chance.

I think fair would be no peaks, just teams and a smart write up per series etc.

PatsSoxKnicks
04-13-2018, 02:50 AM
It will start in late April. I think we can make a Co work!

Yeah while I won't be as busy at the end of April, still have some other stuff to do on the side. Don't want to spend as much time on the game as I normally do (and I say this knowing I'll probably spend way more time than I want to lol)

valade16
04-13-2018, 05:27 PM
I'm trying to put together a timeline of which teams have won each of the All-Time games, but I can only remember so far back. I've got the 2017 No-MVP ATRD, the 2017 All-Time Auction, the 2016 All-Time Auction, the 2016 ATRD, and the 2015 ATRD.

I'm looking for help for the older ones. For instance, can anybody remember which of the teams won in 2014? Here is the link to the clubhouses:

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?862324-Clubhouses

And if anyone has any info from before the 2014 one as that was my first year on who won in which years it'd be awesome. Just trying to create some continuity!

Redrum187
04-13-2018, 08:14 PM
Can we get a commitment from Ebb's to post matchups on his twitter? I don't like (or trust) PSD to vote based on the rules/criteria. There are rules, but everyone agrees that some people will take a dump on it and not vote that way. Also, Ebb's twitter will provide a bigger pool.

Redrum187
04-13-2018, 08:22 PM
We could have a PSD poll too, and then add the 3 or 4 total votes from the PSD match up to the twitter votes.

For example:

Twitter Voting Outcome: 125-50
PSD Voting Outcome: 3-1
Overall Voting Outcome: 128-51

Shammyguy3
04-13-2018, 08:30 PM
I'm trying to put together a timeline of which teams have won each of the All-Time games, but I can only remember so far back. I've got the 2017 No-MVP ATRD, the 2017 All-Time Auction, the 2016 All-Time Auction, the 2016 ATRD, and the 2015 ATRD.

I'm looking for help for the older ones. For instance, can anybody remember which of the teams won in 2014? Here is the link to the clubhouses:

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?862324-Clubhouses

And if anyone has any info from before the 2014 one as that was my first year on who won in which years it'd be awesome. Just trying to create some continuity!

Kts won in 2014 i yhink

Lakers + Giants
04-15-2018, 02:56 AM
Yes, this would be soooo much better if ebbs would post em on his twitter.

killthesux
04-15-2018, 09:31 AM
ill play

killthesux
04-15-2018, 09:32 AM
Kts won in 2014 i yhink

I never won

Shammyguy3
04-15-2018, 11:14 AM
I never won

That Kareem team didnt win?

valade16
04-15-2018, 12:19 PM
That Kareem team didnt win?

Yeah that Kareem team was crazy good, but I seem to recall Lucky/Rochester winning with the Karl Malone/Bill Walton team.

ChiSox219
04-15-2018, 01:03 PM
Yeah that Kareem team was crazy good, but I seem to recall Lucky/Rochester winning with the Karl Malone/Bill Walton team.

Do you have links to some of the other previous draft threads?

valade16
04-15-2018, 01:49 PM
Do you have links to some of the other previous draft threads?

I do. Look at this subforum:

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/forumdisplay.php?406-NBA-All-Time-ReDraft-Regular-Season-Results

The 2016, 2015 and 2014 All-Time Redraft results are stickied at the top.

One thing I'd say, is keep in mind that these re-drafts are from 2 years ago at the latest, so a lot of players may not be drafted where they may be drafted this go round (LeBron, Curry, Kawhi, Harden, Westbrook, Giannis, Butler, George, Lillard, Davis, etc.).

Raps18-19 Champ
04-15-2018, 05:59 PM
Again, which player that will substantially sway votes hasn't played regularly in the playoffs?

McGrady, Paul, Davis, Melo, Hill, along with the dozen other players drafted in the first 3-4 round who can't get enough votes because of "ringz". And now you want to punish them even more by making them take their playoff stats when they could barely make the playoff sometimes to begin with or would play like 4 games when they do make it?

Even guys like Ray Allen, and Carter were well past their statistical prime (early to mid 20s) when they was consistently making the playoffs (late 20s or older). Bosh was a low teens scorer in the playoffs for Miami's title teams even though he was clearly at his best in Toronto averaging over 20 and 10 on a consistent basis and probably would have done better if he had more health. Jason Kidd's total playoff numbers are garbage because he played basically over half his playoff games from like age 32 onwards.

No one is going to agree to that.

valade16
04-16-2018, 02:28 PM
Hey everyone!

I have posted the rules in the Rules thread and created the sub-forum here:

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/forumdisplay.php?397-NBA-All-Time-Re-Draft

Look over the rules and if you have any comments/suggestions/etc. please post in the Lounge thread. I'm open to changing any rules for the good of the game.

Also, if you are playing, please check-in by posting/creating your clubhouse in the clubhouse thread.

The game will hopefully start in a couple weeks!

GREATNESS ONE
04-16-2018, 06:43 PM
We could have a PSD poll too, and then add the 3 or 4 total votes from the PSD match up to the twitter votes.

For example:

Twitter Voting Outcome: 125-50
PSD Voting Outcome: 3-1
Overall Voting Outcome: 128-51

:laugh2:

Shammyguy3
04-16-2018, 08:51 PM
McGrady, Paul, Davis, Melo, Hill, along with the dozen other players drafted in the first 3-4 round who can't get enough votes because of "ringz".

First off, making this game based off of post-season dominance/performance doesn't change this. Those guys will always have that knock on them regardless. But in this scenario, maybe we can focus more on the why they have no rings, instead. Does Chris Paul not have a ring because he isn't really good in the playoffs? No, CP3 averages 19/10/4.5 in the regular season on a 25.6 PER and 7.5 BPM for his career. CP3 in the playoffs averages 21/9.5/5 on a 25.5 PEr and 8.3 BPM.

CP3 would instead be looked at for how great he played, despite not having a ring.


And now you want to punish them even more by making them take their playoff stats when they could barely make the playoff sometimes to begin with or would play like 4 games when they do make it?

McGrady played in 38 games from age 20 to 28.
Chris Paul has played in 77 playoff games
Carmelo Anthony has played in 67 playoff games

The only player you listed that didn't play much in the playoffs was Grant Hill (19 playoff games from age 23-34). But with detroit before he got hurt, he averaged 21/7/6 on a poor ts% (51.4%), but a high PER (24), BPM (6.9). So, he didn't go "ghost" in the playoffs.

It is not about the quantity of games, but the production they had in the games that mattered most. Typically, the best players are on teams that make the playoffs. Some of those best players though under-perform in the playoffs.


Even guys like Ray Allen, and Carter were well past their statistical prime (early to mid 20s) when they was consistently making the playoffs (late 20s or older). Bosh was a low teens scorer in the playoffs for Miami's title teams even though he was clearly at his best in Toronto averaging over 20 and 10 on a consistent basis and probably would have done better if he had more health. Jason Kidd's total playoff numbers are garbage because he played basically over half his playoff games from like age 32 onwards.

No one is going to agree to that.


Ray Allen played in 37 playoff games in his 20s. He was a monster in those 37 games. So that is what matters. You can also factor in that he played in 91 others with the Celtics past his prime, but he showed that he still had a clutch gene. The only thing that was low was his per game numbers, his actual production on the floor was right in line with what was expected.

Vince carter played in 30 playoff games in his 20s. He was not a monster. There was a clear difference in regular season Vince Carter and post-season Vince Carter. And he should get docked for that.

Chris Bosh played in 89 playoff games in his 20s. He has played in zero playoff games otherwise. Chris Bosh was a different player in Miami because of the system, not because he was bad or "old" like you are arguing other guys' in the playoffs. Check Bosh's production, it is actually arguably better in Miami. So I fail to see your point.


Jason Kidd played in 62 playoff games in his 20s. He played in 96 playoff games in his 30s. But what would you consider J-Kidd's "past his prime years" honestly?

Jason Kidd age 23-29 per36: 15.1/7.9/6.2 on a 0.111 WS/48, 48.9ts%, 18.6 PER, 5.0BPM
Jason Kidd age 30-39: 9.9/7.1/6.3 on a 0.116 WS/48, 50.9ts%, 16.0 PER 5.2 BPM

So even if we lump very productive age 30-33 seasons with age 34-39 seasons (bringing down the averages), on a minute basis Kidd was similarly productive in a slightly different role.


So I still fail to see how voting based on how well these guys play in the playoffs (A) changes anything about the "rings" argument - if anything it brings more context to it and (B) is a bad thing

murphturph
04-17-2018, 01:50 AM
Count me in!!!

Have you ever played before? Yes!
Would you like a Co-Manager? No way!

GREATNESS ONE
04-17-2018, 04:05 AM
Count me in!!!

Have you ever played before? Yes!
Would you like a Co-Manager? No way!

What if it was Tracy McGrady?

murphturph
04-17-2018, 04:29 AM
What if it was Tracy McGrady?

I'd consider it.

Lucky.
04-17-2018, 01:32 PM
Haven't read any of this thread but I got the PM from Valade.

If it's a regular RD and no MJ I'd be down.

If any OGs want a Co I don't mind. If not an OG I'll be by myself.

valade16
04-17-2018, 01:39 PM
Haven't read any of this thread but I got the PM from Valade.

If it's a regular RD and no MJ I'd be down.

If any OGs want a Co I don't mind. If not an OG I'll be by myself.

Check out the rules in the sub-forum, there's MJ but there's the MJ rule, so it's a pretty debilitating consequence for taking him.

mrblisterdundee
04-17-2018, 04:34 PM
I'm interested.

Have you ever played before?
• No
Would you like a Co-Manager?
• No
What rules would you like/not like to see?
• I'm used to playing ESPN Fantasy Basketball. The only things I don't like are limitations on games played by position. I don't know if that's applicable here.

valade16
04-17-2018, 04:36 PM
I'm interested.

Have you ever played before?
• No
Would you like a Co-Manager?
• No
What rules would you like/not like to see?
• I'm used to playing ESPN Fantasy Basketball. The only things I don't like are limitations on games played by position. I don't know if that's applicable here.

Probably not as you can start or play your players at any position you want.

Here is a link to the sub-forum:

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/forumdisplay.php?397-NBA-All-Time-Re-Draft

Check out the rules and post in the clubhouse thread to reserve your clubhouse and spot in the game!

Raps18-19 Champ
04-17-2018, 09:58 PM
First off, making this game based off of post-season dominance/performance doesn't change this. Those guys will always have that knock on them regardless. But in this scenario, maybe we can focus more on the why they have no rings, instead. Does Chris Paul not have a ring because he isn't really good in the playoffs? No, CP3 averages 19/10/4.5 in the regular season on a 25.6 PER and 7.5 BPM for his career. CP3 in the playoffs averages 21/9.5/5 on a 25.5 PEr and 8.3 BPM.

CP3 would instead be looked at for how great he played, despite not having a ring.

Yes but it's difficult to compare someone who only makes the 1st/2nd round to someone who makes the ECF/WCF or finals. Paul may not be the reason they aren't making the 2nd or CF but he might **** the bed if he were to have made the finals. Some guys could play bad in the 1st round but may have excelled in the ECF/WCF or finals if they had the opportunity to make it.

It might also indicate that Paul needs to be a 3rd/4th option to succeed when he could have been a 1st/2nd option had he been given the opportunity. So giving me his stats doesn't indicate at all why he didn't win a ring nor does it indicate how well he would have played if he had the opportunity to win the ring at a certain point in his career.



McGrady played in 38 games from age 20 to 28.
Chris Paul has played in 77 playoff games
Carmelo Anthony has played in 67 playoff games

The only player you listed that didn't play much in the playoffs was Grant Hill (19 playoff games from age 23-34). But with detroit before he got hurt, he averaged 21/7/6 on a poor ts% (51.4%), but a high PER (24), BPM (6.9). So, he didn't go "ghost" in the playoffs.

It is not about the quantity of games, but the production they had in the games that mattered most. Typically, the best players are on teams that make the playoffs. Some of those best players though under-perform in the playoffs.

Quantity needs to matter. It's difficult to compare production when the quantity varies too much. Some guys play 40 playoff games whereas some guys play 100 playoff games. In those games, a guy might only play 10 relevant playoff games out of 40 while a guy plays 70 relevant playoff game out of 100.

A guy can play well in 4 games getting swept in the 1st round whereas a guy who faces tougher competition in the 2nd and 3rd rounds suffer a decrease in stats. A guy who has a bad series can't make up for it in the 2nd and 3rd rounds the way other guys do.

This isn't like the regular season where we can expect guys to play 82 games so we have a common sample size to compare. These guys don't always get the opportunity to showcase themselves for reasons that aren't their own and not like they were given the opportunity and failed.



Ray Allen played in 37 playoff games in his 20s. He was a monster in those 37 games. So that is what matters. You can also factor in that he played in 91 others with the Celtics past his prime, but he showed that he still had a clutch gene. The only thing that was low was his per game numbers, his actual production on the floor was right in line with what was expected.

Yes but his role changed and he made the playoff once between age 26 to 31 so clearly the perception of Allen would change looking at his 37 playoff games with SEA/MIL to his 134 games as a Celtic. Celtics were not his prime years but I have to choose to look at him in that light (because his team may not have been good enough even though he might have been a better version of himself). It's almost impossible for me to judge how well he was in his prime because I don't have a big enough sample size (and there's a gap between the playoff appearances).



Vince carter played in 30 playoff games in his 20s. He was not a monster. There was a clear difference in regular season Vince Carter and post-season Vince Carter. And he should get docked for that.

But he also never got the opportunity to play much in the postseason in his prime with the Raptors. Vince only played 15 out of his 88 playoff games in the playoffs as a Raptor (his prime years). Maybe he could have shown he could be the "monster" if his team actually made the playoffs. There's a gap of 5 years too between his Raptor and Nets extended playoff appearance. We're lucky he played similar between the 2 playoff runs but you know how difficult it would be to judge a player like that if the gap was bigger or they had to change their role?



Chris Bosh played in 89 playoff games in his 20s. He has played in zero playoff games otherwise. Chris Bosh was a different player in Miami because of the system, not because he was bad or "old" like you are arguing other guys' in the playoffs. Check Bosh's production, it is actually arguably better in Miami. So I fail to see your point.

I'm not just arguing old/bad. Because of reasons that aren't his own fault, the best sample size means I have to judge Bosh's performance as a 3rd option even though he was a top 10-20 player in the league as a 1st option in his prime and may have been able to prove his capabilities in the playoffs as a 1st option if he had the opportunity.


Jason Kidd played in 62 playoff games in his 20s. He played in 96 playoff games in his 30s. But what would you consider J-Kidd's "past his prime years" honestly?

Jason Kidd age 23-29 per36: 15.1/7.9/6.2 on a 0.111 WS/48, 48.9ts%, 18.6 PER, 5.0BPM
Jason Kidd age 30-39: 9.9/7.1/6.3 on a 0.116 WS/48, 50.9ts%, 16.0 PER 5.2 BPM

So even if we lump very productive age 30-33 seasons with age 34-39 seasons (bringing down the averages), on a minute basis Kidd was similarly productive in a slightly different role.

Then are we judging playoff games for their prime playoff years or overall years?

Because it's difficult to compare playoff numbers for a guy like Kidd then. Some guys might have played like 15 playoff games in their prime years. No one is going to compare that to prime Kidd's nearly 50 playoff games. And a guy might have like 50 playoff games (mostly in his prime) and his stats might dominate Kidd's nearly 150 total playoff games.



So I still fail to see how voting based on how well these guys play in the playoffs (A) changes anything about the "rings" argument - if anything it brings more context to it and (B) is a bad thing

It's a bad thing because you judge players given completely different situations in an even smaller sample size and comparing different stages of their career. Guys like KG sometimes have to face a narrative that he couldn't win a ring without more help. Talking strictly about his playoff numbers in such a small sample size will only shed less light on the fact that he was killing it in the regular season.

Even then, we vote seedings to see who makes the playoffs. Then the general public votes to see who would do better in the playoffs. Every single GM refers to playoff stats anyways in a playoff matchup so not like people are missing out.

Valade made the rules anyway. Seems like it's regular season.

roshan3ai
04-17-2018, 10:40 PM
Have you ever played before? Yes
Would you like a Co-Manager? No
What rules would you like/not like to see? No preference

Super.
05-01-2018, 12:25 PM
Only if I can lose to Jordan & Kawhi and no one else in the finals because they're the darlings of idiot voters

tredigs
05-08-2018, 12:29 AM
Start already? I'm 1 for 1 winner on these with PSK (what a guy). Let's draft another.

Edit: N/m too late. Not sure why this thread is still stickied.

GREATNESS ONE
05-08-2018, 10:56 AM
G: Pete Maravich
G: CLyde Drexler
G: Mitch Richmond
G: Joe Dumars
G: Klay Thompson
G: Squid
G: Thunder Dan
G: Penny Hardaway
G: Brandon Roy
G: James Haren
G: Jason Kidd
G: Elgin Baylor
G: Alvin Robertson
G: Chris Mullin
G: Reggie Miller
G: David Thompson
G: John Havlicek
G: Sam Jones
G: Micheal Cooper
G: George GERvin
G: Rick Barry
G: Dwayne Wade


These are the Starting SG’s that are supposed to stop MJ?

:laugh2:

Shammyguy3
05-09-2018, 12:54 PM
G: Pete Maravich
G: CLyde Drexler
G: Mitch Richmond
G: Joe Dumars
G: Klay Thompson
G: Squid
G: Thunder Dan
G: Penny Hardaway
G: Brandon Roy
G: James Haren
G: Jason Kidd
G: Elgin Baylor
G: Alvin Robertson
G: Chris Mullin
G: Reggie Miller
G: David Thompson
G: John Havlicek
G: Sam Jones
G: Micheal Cooper
G: George GERvin
G: Rick Barry
G: Dwayne Wade


These are the Starting SG’s that are supposed to stop MJ?

:laugh2:

Name me any SG that would "stop" MJ

GREATNESS ONE
05-09-2018, 01:12 PM
Name me any SG that would "stop" MJ

Luckys team looks good w/ Pippen/Kobe, you’ll would need a top defensive SG and a Top Defensive wing.

But you’re right no one can “stop” MJ