2020 Historic Draft: How’s My Team Look: Conference Finals winners announced!!

[Donoghus]

Iverson could score 35-40 in today's game but do you really want someone as inefficient as Iverson putting up the 28-35 shots a game it would take to get that 35-40 points.

The guy was a chucker. He never saw a shot he didn't think he could make. And in this exercise where instead of preying on lots of mediocre to poor players and teams, he would be playing against the elite, so I don't buy he would be more efficient.

Actually the opposite. I believe inefficient chuckers would be even more inefficient in these exercises because they have to play great players and teams all the time. It's why, when talking to Roy the other day, I mentioned, in these exercises I want guards that are efficient scorers that make their teammates better.

Inefficient scorers, IMHO, would be even more inefficient in these games.

I envision him more in a microwave, 6th man role with my squad.  People may question whether he'd accept that, which is legit.   He did play on some national teams and I always thought he could pull back into more of a team player when he wanted to like in ASGs when he was surrounded by good talent which is what I feel like I'm putting around him.

[RPGenerate]

PG: Gary Payton/Kyrie Irving
SG: Rip Hamilton/Raja Bell
SF: Carmelo Anthony/Glenn Robinson
PF: Draymond Green/Anthony Mason
C: Tim Duncan/DeMarcus Cousins

My ten-man lineup is finally complete, and I'm pretty happy with it. Anthony Mason was my first pick of this draft that was completely off-the-cuff, but I'm happy with him. I loved hearing the stories of those tough Knicks teams of the 90s, and Mason was a big part of those team. Really stumped on who I'm gonna pick next, so any suggestions would be great!

[RPGenerate]

My Problem with Iverson is that he could never seem to get along with any other high profile player, and combined with his inefficient play, makes him a tough fit for this draft. What could have been if he decided to take a step back for Melo on those Nuggets teams...

[action781]

Iverson could score 35-40 in today's game but do you really want someone as inefficient as Iverson putting up the 28-35 shots a game it would take to get that 35-40 points.

The guy was a chucker. He never saw a shot he didn't think he could make. And in this exercise where instead of preying on lots of mediocre to poor players and teams, he would be playing against the elite, so I don't buy he would be more efficient.

Actually the opposite. I believe inefficient chuckers would be even more inefficient in these exercises because they have to play great players and teams all the time. It's why, when talking to Roy the other day, I mentioned, in these exercises I want guards that are efficient scorers that make their teammates better.

Inefficient scorers, IMHO, would be even more inefficient in these games.

It's why, in this game, I would take IT's great Boston year over anything Iverson ever did.

No, I definitely don't want Iverson scoring 35-40 points per game on my team.  Just like I don't want Harden on my team averaging 36ppg.  I'm just saying that I think he could have.  And I think its a pretty impressive feat.  Just like Westbrook averaging a triple double was, even if I don't agree with the way he got there.

Very fair thought on IT.  But again, different eras, teams, and coaches and all.  If you put Iverson on that 2017 Celtics team I think you'll get a lot closer production to IT than if you took IT and put him on that 2001 76ers team.  Actually I don't think its unfathomable to think Iverson could have outproduced IT if he were in that position in 2017.  We'll never know that though... so based on evidence, the logic on taking IT instead is very sound.

You can actually look up points per possession on basketball-reference.  Iverson was “only” 18th since 2000. 

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&per_minute_base=36&type=per_poss&per_poss_base=100&season_start=1&season_end=-1&lg_id=NBA&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&height_min=0&height_max=99&year_min=2000&birth_country_is=Y&as_comp=gt&as_val=0&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=pts_per_g_req&c1stat=pts_per_poss&c1comp=gt&order_by=pts_per_poss

Does that measure what you were looking at?

Interestingly, among the top 25 such seasons, Giannas ranks second and third in efficiency as measured by eFG%.  Curry ranks first among the top-25, and has another season that would rank 2nd in the top-40.

I wasn't really objectively trying to measure something.  I was very intentionally trying to manipulate numbers to show that Iverson could be a 35-40ppg scorer. 

[Roy H.]

  I was very intentionally trying to manipulate numbers to show that Iverson could be a 35-40ppg scorer.

Haha.  I can’t argue with that.

[action781]

Requesting some feedback on Jaylen Brown and what position he's best suited to play.

Jaylen is a classic SG/SF type of player.  He's listed as 6'6" (in the "real heights" era) and 223 lbs.  Has played 43% of his career minutes at SG and 50% of them at SF.  (And 7% at PF)

I feel like there is no SG in the league that has purely physical attributes (speed/size/strength) that outmatch Jaylen to the point where he can't match up on that player.  I feel like there are a few SFs in the league however -- Durant and Giannis and maybe LeBron -- that have physical attributes of length and strength that would overpower Jaylen.

Am I correct in those thoughts?  Does that make Jaylen generally a better fit at SG than SF?  Or are those SFs just the kinds of players who are matchup problems for everyone and Jaylen is normally as fine to play SF as any other more typical SFs?

[gouki88]

Requesting some feedback on Jaylen Brown and what position he's best suited to play.

Jaylen is a classic SG/SF type of player.  He's listed as 6'6" (in the "real heights" era) and 223 lbs.  Has played 43% of his career minutes at SG and 50% of them at SF.  (And 7% at PF)

I feel like there is no SG in the league that has purely physical attributes (speed/size/strength) that outmatch Jaylen to the point where he can't match up on that player.  I feel like there are a few SFs in the league however -- Durant and Giannis and maybe LeBron -- that have physical attributes of length and strength that would overpower Jaylen.

Am I correct in those thoughts?  Does that make Jaylen generally a better fit at SG than SF?  Or are those SFs just the kinds of players who are matchup problems for everyone and Jaylen is normally as fine to play SF as any other more typical SFs?

I think a lot of this greatly depends on how many minutes you see Smart getting. Smart, Brown and Rondo are all strong defenders to varying degrees (1x DPOY candidate, 1x All-Defence team, 1x well above-average defensive wing), so I think playing Brown at perhaps a position he's a bit weaker at in SF will be alright. Mashburn will probably be defended by the opposition small forward as he was about 20lbs heavier than JB.

I think a true center off your bench would help this, as it would make your bench more flexible. Brown is definitely better suited to SG, but as of now I see your bench as:
1 x PG
2 x SG
1 x SF
1 x PF

I never liked Boozer at center, but his fellow Utah big-man from that team is still available, so a guy of that mould might help

[Who]

Requesting some feedback on Jaylen Brown and what position he's best suited to play.

Jaylen is a classic SG/SF type of player.  He's listed as 6'6" (in the "real heights" era) and 223 lbs.  Has played 43% of his career minutes at SG and 50% of them at SF.  (And 7% at PF)

I feel like there is no SG in the league that has purely physical attributes (speed/size/strength) that outmatch Jaylen to the point where he can't match up on that player.  I feel like there are a few SFs in the league however -- Durant and Giannis and maybe LeBron -- that have physical attributes of length and strength that would overpower Jaylen.

Am I correct in those thoughts?  Does that make Jaylen generally a better fit at SG than SF?  Or are those SFs just the kinds of players who are matchup problems for everyone and Jaylen is normally as fine to play SF as any other more typical SFs?

I believe Jaylen is a true SF who can play some SG. Rather than a SG who can play some SF. He gives you strong defense/scoring at SG but is deficient in passing & ball-handling relative to the position and his shooting is streaky-to-solid (more dependable this year than the past). At SF, Jaylen maintains strong scoring/defense and is average at passing & ball-handling and his shooting is above average. More well rounded.

I wouldn't worry about it either way. The listing doesn't matter.

There will be matchups were you want him at SG to go big on the wing and other matchups were you want that extra ball-handling / playmaking / maybe outside shooting at SG so you go with Jaylen at SF. The guy gives you that versatility. That is part of his value. Being able to pick and choose those matchups.

Mashburn is a guy who would play PF in today's IRL league (rather than SF due to footspeed) and in this Historical League can go either spot (SF/PF). I'd rate Jaylen above Mash at SF due (1) large advantage defensively in Jaylen's favour (2) Jaylen better team offense [playing off of others] whereas Mash needed the ball in his hands a lot to be effective (why he struggled in Miami).

I see Jaylen as your best overall player off your bench.

[Who]

Requesting some feedback on Jaylen Brown and what position he's best suited to play.

Jaylen is a classic SG/SF type of player.  He's listed as 6'6" (in the "real heights" era) and 223 lbs.  Has played 43% of his career minutes at SG and 50% of them at SF.  (And 7% at PF)

I feel like there is no SG in the league that has purely physical attributes (speed/size/strength) that outmatch Jaylen to the point where he can't match up on that player.  I feel like there are a few SFs in the league however -- Durant and Giannis and maybe LeBron -- that have physical attributes of length and strength that would overpower Jaylen.

Am I correct in those thoughts?  Does that make Jaylen generally a better fit at SG than SF?  Or are those SFs just the kinds of players who are matchup problems for everyone and Jaylen is normally as fine to play SF as any other more typical SFs?

I think a lot of this greatly depends on how many minutes you see Smart getting. Smart, Brown and Rondo are all strong defenders to varying degrees (1x DPOY candidate, 1x All-Defence team, 1x well above-average defensive wing), so I think playing Brown at perhaps a position he's a bit weaker at in SF will be alright. Mashburn will probably be defended by the opposition small forward as he was about 20lbs heavier than JB.

Mashburn was a monster at 250lbs. I loved watching him and Baron Davis play together. That team was so much fun with Paul Silas coaching.

That series they had against Miami in early 2000s was one of the most fun total destruction of an opponent I have seen in the playoffs. They just decimated Miami. With quickness, forcing turnovers and hard running (led by Baron Davis). It was so much fun to watch. Textbook fastbreaking basketball. And then in the half-court Mash took over. He was a matchup nightmare with his physical size/power and high skill-level.

I loved Baron when he was young and played more like Rondo than gunning for 20-25ppg. He was an awesome playmaking defensive minded PG. When I was considering drafting Baron, I was tempted to go with the younger version for this Historical League to get rid of some of his inefficient scoring.

[Somebody]

I've watched a pair of games with Allen Iverson in them this week and I forgot just how insanely fun he was to watch when playing well. That speed, oh wow, electric. Nobody could stay in front of him.

Iverson would be a complete terror in today's league with no hand-checking and spaced out offenses. Nobody would stand a chance of stopping him.

I mostly agree. I think the hand checking thing is a little bit overrated here, because Iverson played after that rule was changed in 2004 without seeing a huge change in production.  However, with sufficient spacing he would have been able to get to the hoop much more easily. His speed and ballhandling would at times make him look like Russell Westbrook on fast forward.

Iversion averaged 31.1ppg in his 2000-2001 MVP season.  His 76ers played at a pace of 90.9 possessions per game.*

James Harden averaged a ridiculous 36.1ppg last season.  The highest scoring season of any player in this game.  His Rockets played at a (surprisingly slow) pace of 97.9 possessions per game. 

If you simply play the '01 76ers at the (relatively slow) pace of last season's Rockets, that would put Iverson at 34.5ppg.  If you also account for things like
-the level of physicality difference between 2001 and 2019
-the emphasis on players today shooting more 3s
-the emphasis on surrounding Harden with outside shooters that opens up the lane for him

I think Iverson in the league today would be the player with the highest scoring season in this game and I think it's not crazy to think he could approach 40ppg in the "right" situation in the league today.  I think he was that good.  He was the guy who in the 2nd or 3rd round I made a post saying something like "I would be open to the idea of trading away my entire team so far for a bunch of 4th/5th round picks and building a guy around one MVP player still on the board".

I'll post my ideal Iverson roster in a post to follow.

-----
*Note:  You could actually get Iverson more points per game by choosing his higher scoring 2002 season of 31.4ppg which played at a slower pace of 88.9 possessions per game.

You can actually look up points per possession on basketball-reference.  Iverson was “only” 18th since 2000. 

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&per_minute_base=36&type=per_poss&per_poss_base=100&season_start=1&season_end=-1&lg_id=NBA&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&height_min=0&height_max=99&year_min=2000&birth_country_is=Y&as_comp=gt&as_val=0&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=pts_per_g_req&c1stat=pts_per_poss&c1comp=gt&order_by=pts_per_poss

Does that measure what you were looking at?

Interestingly, among the top 25 such seasons, Giannas ranks second and third in efficiency as measured by eFG%.  Curry ranks first among the top-25, and has another season that would rank 2nd in the top-40.  Shaq and Lebron also rank highly.

TS% is a better stat for measuring overall efficiency, it includes free throws. Also one more thing about comparing players in different seasons: use rTS% instead of raw TS% (basically raw TS% minus league average TS% that season) to account for different eras. Saying that Russell Westbrook is as efficient as say Vince Carter when it comes to scoring is pretty baffling (had it brought up in a PM, no offence to the guy who said it, I'm just using it as an example) when you consider that the deadball era in the early aughts was much less scoring-friendly than the pace and space era of nowadays.

[nickagneta]

I've watched a pair of games with Allen Iverson in them this week and I forgot just how insanely fun he was to watch when playing well. That speed, oh wow, electric. Nobody could stay in front of him.

Iverson would be a complete terror in today's league with no hand-checking and spaced out offenses. Nobody would stand a chance of stopping him.

I mostly agree. I think the hand checking thing is a little bit overrated here, because Iverson played after that rule was changed in 2004 without seeing a huge change in production.  However, with sufficient spacing he would have been able to get to the hoop much more easily. His speed and ballhandling would at times make him look like Russell Westbrook on fast forward.

Iversion averaged 31.1ppg in his 2000-2001 MVP season.  His 76ers played at a pace of 90.9 possessions per game.*

James Harden averaged a ridiculous 36.1ppg last season.  The highest scoring season of any player in this game.  His Rockets played at a (surprisingly slow) pace of 97.9 possessions per game. 

If you simply play the '01 76ers at the (relatively slow) pace of last season's Rockets, that would put Iverson at 34.5ppg.  If you also account for things like
-the level of physicality difference between 2001 and 2019
-the emphasis on players today shooting more 3s
-the emphasis on surrounding Harden with outside shooters that opens up the lane for him

I think Iverson in the league today would be the player with the highest scoring season in this game and I think it's not crazy to think he could approach 40ppg in the "right" situation in the league today.  I think he was that good.  He was the guy who in the 2nd or 3rd round I made a post saying something like "I would be open to the idea of trading away my entire team so far for a bunch of 4th/5th round picks and building a guy around one MVP player still on the board".

I'll post my ideal Iverson roster in a post to follow.

-----
*Note:  You could actually get Iverson more points per game by choosing his higher scoring 2002 season of 31.4ppg which played at a slower pace of 88.9 possessions per game.

You can actually look up points per possession on basketball-reference.  Iverson was “only” 18th since 2000. 

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&per_minute_base=36&type=per_poss&per_poss_base=100&season_start=1&season_end=-1&lg_id=NBA&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&height_min=0&height_max=99&year_min=2000&birth_country_is=Y&as_comp=gt&as_val=0&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=pts_per_g_req&c1stat=pts_per_poss&c1comp=gt&order_by=pts_per_poss

Does that measure what you were looking at?

Interestingly, among the top 25 such seasons, Giannas ranks second and third in efficiency as measured by eFG%.  Curry ranks first among the top-25, and has another season that would rank 2nd in the top-40.  Shaq and Lebron also rank highly.

TS% is a better stat for measuring overall efficiency, it includes free throws. Also one more thing about comparing players in different seasons: use rTS% instead of raw TS% (basically raw TS% minus league average TS% that season) to account for different eras. Saying that Russell Westbrook is as efficient as say Vince Carter is nonsensical (had it brought up in a PM, no offence to the guy who said it, I'm just using it as an example) when you consider that the deadball era in the early aughts was much less scoring-friendly than the pace and space era of nowadays.

I find rTS% to be an over thought out load of crap unless comparing pre and post three point line basketball. Scoring efficiency ebbs and flows every year and this era is all a total three point era.

Just because league average goes up or down, doesn't change the overall view of efficiency. Just because everyone discovers a new way every to play the game every few years, doesn't change the nature of the game. Efficient is efficient.

In my opinion, in this era, a TS% over 57% is good efficiency. Over 60% excellent efficiency. Over 62% elite efficiency. How those numbers compare to league average for any particular year is really next to meaningless, IMO.

Sorry, my man but not every advanced stats is useful or meaningful. Just because Steve Nash's TS% in 2001 is a point or two higher than the league average than JJRedick's in 2018, doesn't mean much as they both scored the same way and had about the same TS%.

[Who]

TS% is a better stat for measuring overall efficiency, it includes free throws. Also one more thing about comparing players in different seasons: use rTS% instead of raw TS% (basically raw TS% minus league average TS% that season) to account for different eras.

Where do you get rTS%?

It is a very good stat but I do not know where to get it.

[action781]

I think Somebody and nick both have good points on TS% vs rTS%.

To support nick's point, look at the 2014-2016 seasons in TS%.
2014 .541
2015 .534
2016 .541
If a guy had a slightly fluky 3 point percentage in 2015, using rTS% as a metric would overstate him as being very efficient that year even more than he already would be overstated.  There wasn't some real thing affecting league efficiency in 2015.  It was just normal variation.

Similarly, Carter's rTS% is 0.5% higher in 2001 than it would have been had he had that exact season in 2000.  Should it be considered as legitimately such?  Probably not, IMO.

However, I think there is an actual difference between scoring efficiency in Carter's era and Westbrook's era that should be taken into consideration.  I was the one who equated the two players in a PM and while I still don't see them as hugely different, I definitely now recognize a difference worth being mindful of.

[nickagneta]

I think Somebody and nick both have good points on TS% vs rTS%.

To support nick's point, look at the 2014-2016 seasons in TS%.
2014 .541
2015 .534
2016 .541
If a guy had a slightly fluky 3 point percentage in 2015, using rTS% as a metric would overstate him as being very efficient that year even more than he already would be overstated.  There wasn't some real thing affecting league efficiency in 2015.  It was just normal variation.

Similarly, Carter's rTS% is 0.5% higher in 2001 than it would have been had he had that exact season in 2000.  Should it be considered as legitimately such?  Probably not, IMO.

However, I think there is an actual difference between scoring efficiency in Carter's era and Westbrook's era that should be taken into consideration.  I was the one who equated the two players in a PM and while I still don't see them as hugely different, I definitely now recognize a difference worth being mindful of.

I still don't see the value of the stat. If someone shot 55% TS% in 2004 and it was 3 points higher than the league average but in 2016 shot 55% TS% that was 0.5 points above league average doesn't change the fact that they were equally efficient each year. All it means is that compared to league average they were a bit better in 2004 than in 2016. Their efficiency did not change. What changed was how everyone else scored that year.

I understand using it to compare pre and post three point line era players. The rules changed to award more points for a shot. That makes sense.

[gouki88]

I think Somebody and nick both have good points on TS% vs rTS%.

To support nick's point, look at the 2014-2016 seasons in TS%.
2014 .541
2015 .534
2016 .541
If a guy had a slightly fluky 3 point percentage in 2015, using rTS% as a metric would overstate him as being very efficient that year even more than he already would be overstated.  There wasn't some real thing affecting league efficiency in 2015.  It was just normal variation.

Similarly, Carter's rTS% is 0.5% higher in 2001 than it would have been had he had that exact season in 2000.  Should it be considered as legitimately such?  Probably not, IMO.

However, I think there is an actual difference between scoring efficiency in Carter's era and Westbrook's era that should be taken into consideration.  I was the one who equated the two players in a PM and while I still don't see them as hugely different, I definitely now recognize a difference worth being mindful of.

I still don't see the value of the stat. If someone shot 55% TS% in 2004 and it was 3 points higher than the league average but in 2016 shot 55% TS% that was 0.5 points above league average doesn't change the fact that they were equally efficient each year. All it means is that compared to league average they were a bit better in 2004 than in 2016. Their efficiency did not change. What changed was how everyone else scored that year.

I understand using it to compare pre and post three point line era players. The rules changed to award more points for a shot. That makes sense.

I'm with you on this. Not sure that efficiency should be relative