CB Draft Ballot Results! (link to file on page 8 and page 1)

[Fafnir]

Well you'll at least be happy to know that McDyess is 15-5 against Dwight Howard, even if he clearly can't match Howard basket for basket or rebound for rebound.

Considering that McDyess wasn't guarding Howard in those matchups and was also not even a top 4 player on those teams I don't think you should try to use that line to support your team.

Useless head to head stats like that typically are a sign to me that GMs don't have a good answer.

[StartOrien]

Well you'll at least be happy to know that McDyess is 15-5 against Dwight Howard, even if he clearly can't match Howard basket for basket or rebound for rebound.

Considering that McDyess wasn't guarding Howard in those matchups and was also not even a top 4 player on those teams I don't think you should try to use that line to support your team.

Useless head to head stats like that typically are a sign to me that GMs don't have a good answer.

For clarification, do you not like the head-head stats in general or just ones where they're clearly not going up against eachother? I actually think that while they certainly don't tell a full story, they're a definitely a good starting point if you're discussing a matchup.

[nickagneta]

the boogie is going to need a kingmaker to convince people he can hang with dwight. you think sarah palin is too busy to rustle up some support against the 'phoenix fat cats'?

As long as we can agree that in the postseason Dwight Howard's name recognition is > defense, turnovers, free throw shooting, and three point shooting?

NOLA Bucs	League Average	Phoenix Gorillas
.475 FG%	.461 FG%	.449 FG%
.781 FT%	.759 FT%	.712 FT%
.374 3PT%	.355 3PT%	.342 3PT%

Point of order IP, playing rookie Cousins 22 mpg is more of a problem than playing two rookie big men, Monroe and Davis 33 mpg?

Or Phase 1 Top 5 Pick, Phase 2 ?, Phase 3 Profit.

Yikes. Someone's going haaaaaard.

Only because I know you're up for it.

(You'll also notice IP is conspicuously silent on his preference for Top 5 picks above all else...)

Conference Finals Champions without one of Kobe, LeBron, Dwayne Wade, Dwight Howard, or Tim Duncan on their rosters: Boston Celtics (2008, 2010), Dallas Mavericks  (2006)

That's not saying a team without those players can't get there, and I'm not saying a team without one of those guys can't beat a team with one of those guys in a playoff series. I'm just saying the NBA is different from any other league in that one player can make all the difference. If your team doesn't have one of those guys, and you're playing a team that does, it doesn't matter how well balanced you are, you still need to be able to stop the one guy from sending you home.

Your team doesn't have anyone remotely close to those guys (well Gerald Wallace is probably close to as good a small forward as Tim Duncan is a center at this point, but the Spurs haven't been "The Spurs" for a couple of years now), so you're going to first have to sell me on how you compensate for that.

Funny that you stop at 2006 and out of 10 teams 30% didn't have one of those huge stars. But let's go back another 5 years and see what happens.

2005 Detroit
2004 Detroit
2003 New Jersey
2002 New Jersey
2001 Philadelphia

Now out of 20 teams we have 40% of the teams not having one of those transcendent stars. Seems to me over the last decade if you didn't have a top 5 overall player in the league you still had about a 40% shot at making the Finals.

Also for many of the championship teams it wasn't overcoming one player. That can easily be done as can be shown by seeing that neither Howard nor LeBron have a title and neither has been paired with another elite player. Most of the champions have complete teams or 2 superstars not just one superstar and a collection of role players

LA - Kobe/Gasol/Odom/Bynum
Boston - Pierce/Allen/Garnett/Rondo
San Antonio - Duncan/Parker/Ginobili
Detroit - Wallace/Wallace/Billups/Hamilton/Prince
Miami - Wade/Sahq
LA - Shaq/Kobe

Simply put IP, teams constructed the way yours is with one superstar and a bunch of role players don't win championships unless you want to go all the way back to the mid 90's and Hakeem's teams when Jordan was gone.

[Who]

Hedo Turkoglu and/or John Salmons will not be able to be effective offensively when matched up against Gerald Wallace. Wallace is too talented and too athletic defensively for them.

Gerald Wallace is also too quick for Turkoglu (slashing offense) and too strong for Salmons (post game + slashing) so he should have a good showing offensively too. Plus, he'll build a very nice rebounding differential against either of them.

Those matchups will hurt Phoenix considerably. Limits their offense. Makes them over-reliant on Baron Davis + Antawn Jamison. Makes them vulnerable and gives New Orleans a shot at winning the series.

[Fafnir]

Well you'll at least be happy to know that McDyess is 15-5 against Dwight Howard, even if he clearly can't match Howard basket for basket or rebound for rebound.

Considering that McDyess wasn't guarding Howard in those matchups and was also not even a top 4 player on those teams I don't think you should try to use that line to support your team.

Useless head to head stats like that typically are a sign to me that GMs don't have a good answer.

For clarification, do you not like the head-head stats in general or just ones where they're clearly not going up against eachother? I actually think that while they certainly don't tell a full story, they're a definitely a good starting point if you're discussing a matchup.

I think head to head stats need to be looked at very carefully. They are a very small sample size and can be very misleading if both players aren't playing similar minutes and positions. (both starting and playing each other)

In the case of Mcdyess versus Howard they're not worth much as McDyess was a rotation to bottom of the rotation guy for all of those, meanwhile Howard is the best player on the team.

I'm not a big fan.

[StartOrien]

Well you'll at least be happy to know that McDyess is 15-5 against Dwight Howard, even if he clearly can't match Howard basket for basket or rebound for rebound.

Considering that McDyess wasn't guarding Howard in those matchups and was also not even a top 4 player on those teams I don't think you should try to use that line to support your team.

Useless head to head stats like that typically are a sign to me that GMs don't have a good answer.

For clarification, do you not like the head-head stats in general or just ones where they're clearly not going up against eachother? I actually think that while they certainly don't tell a full story, they're a definitely a good starting point if you're discussing a matchup.

I think head to head stats need to be looked at very carefully. They are a very small sample size and can be very misleading if both players aren't playing similar minutes and positions. (both starting and playing each other)

In the case of Mcdyess versus Howard they're not worth much as McDyess was a rotation to bottom of the rotation guy for all of those, meanwhile Howard is the best player on the team.

I'm not a big fan.

The numbers provided are almost 100% worthless, they're also 100% inaccurate:

McDeyss averages a 9 and 7, not a 15 and 5.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=mcdyean01&p2=howardw01

WW, should I hire a fact checker before tomorrow?

[The Walker Wiggle]

And the depth thing in the playoffs to me doesn't turn it one way or another. Either you think he'll be healthy, or you don't.

Definitely a very "Euroleague" approach to positions though. No backup 1 because you have Hedo Turkoglu? I don't know if I buy that.

I expect Davis will be reasonably healthy, and should even stay motivated. But he can't play 48 minutes can he? Back-ups don't matter at all in the playoffs?

It is interesting to note that a pair of shooting guards, Rudy Fernandez and Willie Green, both entirely nondescript playmakers, are respectively the sole reserve point guards for Phoenix and Utah, the West's top 2 teams. Most NBA teams carry three point guards.

Least important position? Only in the regular season? Or throughout?

[The Walker Wiggle]

Well you'll at least be happy to know that McDyess is 15-5 against Dwight Howard, even if he clearly can't match Howard basket for basket or rebound for rebound.

Considering that McDyess wasn't guarding Howard in those matchups and was also not even a top 4 player on those teams I don't think you should try to use that line to support your team.

Useless head to head stats like that typically are a sign to me that GMs don't have a good answer.

For clarification, do you not like the head-head stats in general or just ones where they're clearly not going up against eachother? I actually think that while they certainly don't tell a full story, they're a definitely a good starting point if you're discussing a matchup.

I think head to head stats need to be looked at very carefully. They are a very small sample size and can be very misleading if both players aren't playing similar minutes and positions. (both starting and playing each other)

In the case of Mcdyess versus Howard they're not worth much as McDyess was a rotation to bottom of the rotation guy for all of those, meanwhile Howard is the best player on the team.

I'm not a big fan.

The numbers provided are almost 100% worthless, they're also 100% inaccurate:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=mcdyean01&p2=howardw01

WW, should I hire a fact checker before tomorrow?

THE Walker Wiggle! I cheekily threw out McDyess's 15-5 record against Howard, but I also tried to give a more substantive answer. Howard is a nightmare.

I do also at least have the luxury of lots of big bodies, Cousins, Horford, McDyess and Mozgov, so plenty of fouls to give. (Howard is a 59% FT shooter.) And all competent scorers. Dwight won't be able to freely roam off of anybody.

As for fact checking? What did I get wrong this time? (Though it's possible!) Fafnir should fact check calling McDyess a "bottom of the rotation" player. He was typically the starter in San Antonio. And sixth in minutes played during both the regular season and playoffs.

Although I'd agree head to head stats can be misleading in some cases. (Pssst... Don't look at Horford's stats against Howard.)

[The Walker Wiggle]

McDeyss averages a 9 and 7, not a 15 and 5.

That edit explains it. McDyess has a 15-5 career record versus Howard.

[Who]

Well you'll at least be happy to know that McDyess is 15-5 against Dwight Howard, even if he clearly can't match Howard basket for basket or rebound for rebound.

Considering that McDyess wasn't guarding Howard in those matchups and was also not even a top 4 player on those teams I don't think you should try to use that line to support your team.

Useless head to head stats like that typically are a sign to me that GMs don't have a good answer.

For clarification, do you not like the head-head stats in general or just ones where they're clearly not going up against eachother? I actually think that while they certainly don't tell a full story, they're a definitely a good starting point if you're discussing a matchup.

I think head to head stats need to be looked at very carefully. They are a very small sample size and can be very misleading if both players aren't playing similar minutes and positions. (both starting and playing each other)

In the case of Mcdyess versus Howard they're not worth much as McDyess was a rotation to bottom of the rotation guy for all of those, meanwhile Howard is the best player on the team.

I'm not a big fan.

The numbers provided are almost 100% worthless, they're also 100% inaccurate:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=mcdyean01&p2=howardw01

WW, should I hire a fact checker before tomorrow?

THE Walker Wiggle! I cheekily threw out McDyess's 15-5 record against Howard, but I also tried to give a more substantive answer. Howard is a nightmare.

I do also at least have the luxury of lots of big bodies, Cousins, Horford, McDyess and Mozgov, so plenty of fouls to give. (Howard is a 59% FT shooter.) And all competent scorers. Dwight won't be able to freely roam off of anybody.

As for fact checking? What did I get wrong this time? (Though it's possible!) You should fact check calling McDyess a "bottom of the rotation" player. He was typically the starter in San Antonio. And sixth in minutes played during both the regular season and playoffs.

Dwight Howard roamed freely against Al Horford in the playoffs last season.

McDyess can hit that mid range jumper consistently enough to keep Dwight somewhat restrained. Not convinced Cousins can be efficient enough with his jumper + Mosgov can't.

It looks like Dwight is going to have a lot of freedom defensively unless you plan on giving McDyess long minutes against him.

[StartOrien]

The only time I've weighed in on Antonio McDeyss was to pay him a compliment in a discussion involving accomplished veterans vs. skilled rookies.

[StartOrien]

Re-reading the 15-5, I can see what you mean and I don't think you intended to mislead. But it sure as heck read like 15 points, 5 rebounds.

[The Walker Wiggle]

Well you'll at least be happy to know that McDyess is 15-5 against Dwight Howard, even if he clearly can't match Howard basket for basket or rebound for rebound.

Considering that McDyess wasn't guarding Howard in those matchups and was also not even a top 4 player on those teams I don't think you should try to use that line to support your team.

Useless head to head stats like that typically are a sign to me that GMs don't have a good answer.

Oof. This seems a little rough or anyway ungenerous? Of course I didn't expect McDyess's 15-5 record to be a factor in voting. But I felt I did have some "good answers." How about my across the board more efficient offense - better shooting, better free throw shooting, better three point shooting, fewer turnovers (Stat to come on that). Also much better depth - Bell, Kleiza, McDyess, Udrih. And an advantage defensively. (Phoenix has the Defensive Player of the Year but also Antawn Jamison, Baron Davis and Hedo Turkoglu, all offense first, noncommittal man-to-man defenders.)

[indeedproceed]

Funny that you stop at 2006 and out of 10 teams 30% didn't have one of those huge stars. But let's go back another 5 years and see what happens.

2005 Detroit
2004 Detroit
2003 New Jersey
2002 New Jersey
2001 Philadelphia

Now out of 20 teams we have 40% of the teams not having one of those transcendent stars. Seems to me over the last decade if you didn't have a top 5 overall player in the league you still had about a 40% shot at making the Finals.

You keep citing these things without context, Nick. Its an awful habit

2002 Jason Kidd finished 2nd in MVP voting, and he was the 2nd best player in the east in 2003.

2001, Allen Iverson was the MVP, and the best player arguably in the league that year, but surely the best player in the East. In that regard, my "superstars" theory holds true. It was almost ten years ago though, so one would expect the players to change.

Also, how weak was the Eastern conference those years?
2001-2002 50 win teams, East: 2, West: 5
2002-2003 50 win teams, East: 1, West: 6
2003-2004 50 win teams, East: 2, West: 6
2004-2005 50 win teams, East: 2, West: 6

I wouldn't exactly call the East cutthroat those years.

Even that said, those Pistons teams like our Celtics, are the exceptions to the rule. They were legitimate teams. I told WW the exact same thing.

Also for many of the championship teams it wasn't overcoming one player. That can easily be done as can be shown by seeing that neither Howard nor LeBron have a title and neither has been paired with another elite player.

Neither Howard or LeBron has been eliminated by a non-Finals team from the playoffs for the last 2 seasons. Before that Howard was knocked out by the conference finals Detroit Pistons, while LeBron hasn't been knocked out by a non-Finals team since 2006. The people who have taken them out of the playoffs the last two years were either champions, or Finals teams. None of the teams in this league are that good.

And there is more to winning a playoff series besides limiting the best player, I won't contest that, but that is where it has to start.

LA - Kobe/Gasol/Odom/Bynum
Boston - Pierce/Allen/Garnett/Rondo
San Antonio - Duncan/Parker/Ginobili
Detroit - Wallace/Wallace/Billups/Hamilton/Prince
Miami - Wade/Sahq
LA - Shaq/Kobe

Simply put IP, teams constructed the way yours is with one superstar and a bunch of role players don't win championships unless you want to go all the way back to the mid 90's and Hakeem's teams when Jordan was gone.

Well let me say 2 things.

1) I think both Brandon Jennings and Joakim Noah are franchise cornerstones. I don't think anyone will dispute that. I appreciate your need for generous hyperbole, if I make it into the second round you'll have to explain why you should win despite having Wilson Chandler guard LeBron, but neither Noah or Jennings is a 'role player', say in the same fashion that starters like Brendan Haywood, or Mehmet Okur are role players. Jennings is pretty clearly on his way to being a star, and Noah already is widely regarded as one of the best young post defenders and rebounders today.

2) In the real NBA, I'd have very high hopes for my team. With being able to flesh out the 15 man roster and effectively managing minutes, I don't see why they wouldn't be able to win 50 games. However, I concede that this team, without significant growth from Ilyasova, Jennings, and Noah, is not a championship team, in the real NBA. Of course, I don't think any team in this entire game could've beaten the real 2010 Lakers, and I don't think anyone will argue that fact either.

In this game though, I absolutely think they can be champions.

[StartOrien]

Well you'll at least be happy to know that McDyess is 15-5 against Dwight Howard, even if he clearly can't match Howard basket for basket or rebound for rebound.

Considering that McDyess wasn't guarding Howard in those matchups and was also not even a top 4 player on those teams I don't think you should try to use that line to support your team.

Useless head to head stats like that typically are a sign to me that GMs don't have a good answer.

Oof. This seems a little rough or anyway ungenerous? Of course I didn't expect McDyess's 15-5 record to be a factor in voting. But I felt I did have some "good answers." How about my across the board more efficient offense - better shooting, better free throw shooting, better three point shooting, fewer turnovers (Stat to come on that). Also much better depth - Bell, Kleiza, McDyess, Udrih. And an advantage defensively. (Phoenix has the Defensive Player of the Year but also Antawn Jamison, Baron Davis and Hedo Turkoglu, all offense first, noncommittal man-to-man defenders.)

I don't understand this percieved lack of death. I'd take my bench over your bench 1,000 times out of 1,000.

I'm obviously biased, but  if you look at where they were selectd at the very least you'd be able to confirm that I am by no means lying about this. 8 of my rotational players were selected in the first 6 rounds.