2011 CB Historical Draft - Draft Thread

[Roy H.]

But in judging your player the judges can only judge him based on the player he was in the year you reference.

I think there's still some nuance here.  For instance, let's say you take Player X from 1975.  Player X has some major chemistry concerns, but he won titles in 1980 and 1982. 

I think it's fair to a judge to look at the totality of his career and say, "Well, as was shown later, his chemistry didn't stop teams from winning", etc., even if that wasn't a known fact in 1975.  I can see similar arguments regarding "Player Y wouldn't accept a lesser role", etc., if in fact Player Y did accept a lesser role a couple of seasons later.

I'm similarly open to arguments about a player's defense if we saw him play better defense in a different system later (or earlier) in his career, or even arguments that if his role was different, his production might have changed.

In other words, it's all fluid here, and I'm going to listen to how creative people get in their arguments.  At the same time, what I *won't* do is mark down a "one year wonder" based solely upon his lack of an otherwise less stellar career.  Now, I might consider that player's role on the team in his career year, and whether other factors affected his performance.  However, if a go puts up 30 points and 10 assists but never does it again, I'm going to judge him on that 30 / 10, rather than his lesser career averages.

[Edgar]

Wilt     McHale
Kareem   KG
Patrick  Timmy D


Small guys should worry

[KCattheStripe]

I think there's still some nuance here. 

Shocker. 

[KCattheStripe]

Hakeem  Cowens


Small guys should worry

Fixed.

[StartOrien]

I have an unreasonable amount of hatred towards Patrick Ewing and I'll never really understand why. Maybe it's the flaptop?

It's the getting dunked on by Scottie Pippen.

That sounds about right

[33-00-32]

That's a superb defensive team you are putting together 33-00-32

I'll say it again....in a game with only Hall of Famers things are going to be decided by defense. The game isn't getting any longer so you can't have 5 guys score 35 points.

I still have plenty of offense and just added a guy with almost 25,000 points scored!

[KCattheStripe]

That's a superb defensive team you are putting together 33-00-32

I'll say it again....in a game with only Hall of Famers things are going to be decided by defense. The game isn't getting any longer so you can't have 5 guys score 35 points.

I still have plenty of offense and just added a guy with almost 25,000 points scored!

Moranis and I think along the same lines.

[nickagneta]

But in judging your player the judges can only judge him based on the player he was in the year you reference.

I think there's still some nuance here.  For instance, let's say you take Player X from 1975.  Player X has some major chemistry concerns, but he won titles in 1980 and 1982. 

I think it's fair to a judge to look at the totality of his career and say, "Well, as was shown later, his chemistry didn't stop teams from winning", etc., even if that wasn't a known fact in 1975.  I can see similar arguments regarding "Player Y wouldn't accept a lesser role", etc., if in fact Player Y did accept a lesser role a couple of seasons later.

I'm similarly open to arguments about a player's defense if we saw him play better defense in a different system later (or earlier) in his career, or even arguments that if his role was different, his production might have changed.

In other words, it's all fluid here, and I'm going to listen to how creative people get in their arguments.  At the same time, what I *won't* do is mark down a "one year wonder" based solely upon his lack of an otherwise less stellar career.  Now, I might consider that player's role on the team in his career year, and whether other factors affected his performance.  However, if a go puts up 30 points and 10 assists but never does it again, I'm going to judge him on that 30 / 10, rather than his lesser career averages.

Geesh, and here I was thinking I was the commissioner making the rules.

I'll have to remember these interpretations of the rules when the CB Draft comes along and my trades get rejected.

 

[Donoghus]

Absolutely love the Petitt & Ewing picks.

EDIT:  I had Petitt pegged pretty high.  2nd round talent.

[33-00-32]

I have an unreasonable amount of hatred towards Patrick Ewing and I'll never really understand why. Maybe it's the flaptop?

I used to as well (until today, hahaha). Even with Larry legend calling him a friend I still hated him

[Roy H.]

But in judging your player the judges can only judge him based on the player he was in the year you reference.

I think there's still some nuance here.  For instance, let's say you take Player X from 1975.  Player X has some major chemistry concerns, but he won titles in 1980 and 1982. 

I think it's fair to a judge to look at the totality of his career and say, "Well, as was shown later, his chemistry didn't stop teams from winning", etc., even if that wasn't a known fact in 1975.  I can see similar arguments regarding "Player Y wouldn't accept a lesser role", etc., if in fact Player Y did accept a lesser role a couple of seasons later.

I'm similarly open to arguments about a player's defense if we saw him play better defense in a different system later (or earlier) in his career, or even arguments that if his role was different, his production might have changed.

In other words, it's all fluid here, and I'm going to listen to how creative people get in their arguments.  At the same time, what I *won't* do is mark down a "one year wonder" based solely upon his lack of an otherwise less stellar career.  Now, I might consider that player's role on the team in his career year, and whether other factors affected his performance.  However, if a go puts up 30 points and 10 assists but never does it again, I'm going to judge him on that 30 / 10, rather than his lesser career averages.

Geesh, and here I was thinking I was the commissioner making the rules.

I'll have to remember these interpretations of the rules when the CB Draft comes along and my trades get rejected.

 

I just think it's impossible to take a player, put him in a completely different role with different teammates from different eras, and evaluate how he'd do.  I think you need to look at all the tools at your disposal.  I'd go so far as to say, as a panelist, it's impossible to evaluate thinks like role, fit, chemistry, etc., if you're forced to confine yourself to only one year in your analysis.

[nickagneta]

I have an unreasonable amount of hatred towards Patrick Ewing and I'll never really understand why. Maybe it's the flaptop?

I used to as well (until today, hahaha). Even with Larry legend calling him a friend I still hated him

My hatred for Ewing goes back to high school and having to watch our 6'4" center attempt to guard Ewing at Cambridge R&L during the tournament.

Those games were ugly.

[Edgar]

 

OK

HEres the deal
remember the only oppinion that matters is Redz

 


p.s. this just remember me, while i was uploading images, that they air Naruto today on Japan, will be off for half an hour or so
see ya

[Roy H.]

Absolutely love the Petitt & Ewing picks.

Yeah, it's hard to disagree with either at this point. 

[Moranis]

That's a superb defensive team you are putting together 33-00-32

I'll say it again....in a game with only Hall of Famers things are going to be decided by defense. The game isn't getting any longer so you can't have 5 guys score 35 points.

I still have plenty of offense and just added a guy with almost 25,000 points scored!

Moranis and I think along the same lines.

I think defense is important, but I also think there are plenty of elite defenders that will never go anywhere near where we are picking right now that can fill out the bench (that can be in the game when needed).  While there aren't going to be that many truly elite scorers after the next few rounds. 

For me it is about finding the best player available and how that player fits with the better players that have already been drafted to the team.