2011 CB Historical Draft - Draft Thread

[GreenFaith1819]

Better pick them B4 I do .

[StartOrien]

One thing I'll be interested in how owners and judges will look at their players from say the 9th round on.

Would you rather have the best player available, or are you assuming your top 8 are going to take all the minutes and you're better off going w/ all-time specialists?

[GreenFaith1819]

One thing I'll be interested in how owners and judges will look at their players from say the 9th round on.

Would you rather have the best player available, or are you assuming your top 8 are going to take all the minutes and you're better off going w/ all-time specialists?

For me, I think after the 1st pick I started looking at fit. I understand the BPA concept, but for me how a team fit together is most important.

It was debated that KG was a 3rd or 4th rounder, but I just couldn't give up what he brought to the table. IMO, he is of a caliber of 10-15 players that can raise a team to a higher level - just by presence alone.

I still have needs and holes to fill, but I can address those with the 1st 4 rounds this week.

I just don't think that anyone is looking at the players I'm looking at. These 2-3 players I am looking at were highly coveted for what they provided a team, and I think they will slide under the radar.

[mgent]

Do you guys think Hayes and Parish would benefit from me drafting Clifford Ray?

[StartOrien]

But is there any point where you go player x is SIGNIFICANTLY better than player y, but I could use player y on last second defensive plays?

[GreenFaith1819]

But is there any point where you go player x is SIGNIFICANTLY better than player y, but I could use player y on last second defensive plays?

Depends.

IMO, if by Player Y's presence alone it is better that he gets significant minutes - then you keep him in the lineup.

Defense leads to offense. The more stops a team is likely to get, the more opportunities to score.

Depending on your team, if you think your offense will be just about unstoppable by going through 3 players, then IMO you can get away with having a Player Y on the floor for a while - because he will get stops and rebounds.

And - depending on matchups - you can sub out accordingly. That is why IMO the round this week is just as important as last week.

[indeedproceed]

One thing I'll be interested in how owners and judges will look at their players from say the 9th round on.

Would you rather have the best player available, or are you assuming your top 8 are going to take all the minutes and you're better off going w/ all-time specialists?

Symmetry. A team is an amalgamation of talent, true, but an amalgamation of talent is no necessarily a team. If you try to fit a square peg into a round hole, all you have is an empty spot and an angry square peg, no?

[Who]

But is there any point where you go player x is SIGNIFICANTLY better than player y, but I could use player y on last second defensive plays?

I don't think so.

Having a guy who offers a different skill-set is valuable thing though.

[StartOrien]

But is there any point where you go player x is SIGNIFICANTLY better than player y, but I could use player y on last second defensive plays?

I don't think so.

Having a guy who offers a different skill-set is valuable thing though.

But let's use my team for an example -

My big rotation is Russell, Barkley, Mourning. Outside of one other big I don't know if anyone I'd draft would realistically expect anything but spot minutes here and there. Do you think I'm better off drafting someone who I could put in very specific situations, or am I better off taking the BPA for insurance.

I'm not looking for advice, I know how I feel, but I'm wondering what other people think.

[StartOrien]

Personally, I think you're better off taking the specialist unless you're talking about a huge impact player.

[RebusRankin]

I don't think Barkley can play SF.

[nickagneta]

Personally, I think you're better off taking the specialist unless you're talking about a huge impact player.

Depends. If your players in the years they are selected are extremely well rounded players and great in many facets of the game, do you really need a specialist.

For instance. Portland has Sam Jones, Tiny Archibald and Larry Bird in the backcourt and wing. If you need a clutch three pointer are you really going to take out one of them to put in some three point shooting specialist because there's no 3 point stats on Sam Jones and very little on Tiny?

Tiny, Sam and Larry are three of the most clutch outside shooters the game ever saw. Does this team really need a three point specialist are would they be better off with a BPA in case one of the players in front of him gets hurt.

OTOH, not every team is going to have players that have 5 tools, so to say stealing a baseball term, so I can see the need for specialists. Ultimately, it will come down to preference both in putting a team together and judging.

[Who]

But is there any point where you go player x is SIGNIFICANTLY better than player y, but I could use player y on last second defensive plays?

I don't think so.

Having a guy who offers a different skill-set is valuable thing though.

But let's use my team for an example -

My big rotation is Russell, Barkley, Mourning. Outside of one other big I don't know if anyone I'd draft would realistically expect anything but spot minutes here and there. Do you think I'm better off drafting someone who I could put in very specific situations, or am I better off taking the BPA for insurance.

I'm not looking for advice, I know how I feel, but I'm wondering what other people think.

I'd take a guy who can give you can spot minutes over a specialist who you'll only use on last second plays ... but that's me. 

[RebusRankin]

To my opponents take specialists.

[Rondo2287]

Dallas selects: Jerry Sloan as coach