Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 95
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    20,127
    Yes.
    Hell No.
    Any idc.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    21,631
    In

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Sin City Raiders
    Posts
    34,876
    Quote Originally Posted by Lakers + Giants View Post
    Yes.
    Hell No.
    Any idc.
    We should've kept Curry & Shaq! lol

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    54,972
    I'm in if there is no Jordan.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    24,513
    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    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.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    54,972
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    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.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    24,513
    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    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.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    54,972
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    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.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Sin City Raiders
    Posts
    34,876
    Can we start picking names? lolz

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    189
    I'm in. Would prefer no co.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    189
    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?

  12. #27
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    2,252
    I'll do it. Could we make this an auction ATRD? I think that was a lot of fun and the most fair way.
    2015 Bull's Mock Trade Game Championship Team

    San Antonio Spurs

    PG: Chris Paul | Patty Mills | Jose Calderon
    SG: Khris Middleton | J.J. Redick | Iman Shumpert
    SF: DeMarre Carroll | P.J. Tucker | Anthony Morrow
    PF: Tim Duncan | Carlos Boozer | Kyle O'Quinn
    C : Al Horford | Rudy Gobert

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    29,778
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by numba1CHANGsta View Post
    Just trust me, Hou wont make it all the way to the WCF 😉
    Quote Originally Posted by tredigs View Post
    Houston may make the WCF again, but barring injuries they are no longer a serious threat this year imo.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    The U
    Posts
    18,433
    In. Might need a co. Will let you know.





  15. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    54,972
    Im not playing if this is an auction

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •