0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.
Alonzo, huh? For whatever reason he was off my radar, but he was an extremely solid two-way player. Nice.
See start that wasn't so hard.Edgar isn't going to be happy as my string of MVP's will end with this pick.SG - Paul Pierce (01/02 season)Clear no-brainer for me at this point. Getting huge size at SG in a year when Pierce shot over 6 three's a game and hit over 40% of them, scored over 26 a game, and still had solid rebounding and passing numbers all as a SG (also played some time at SF giving my team a lot of roster flexibility). He was also an excellent defender that season with a DRTG below 100 and was actually 4th in the league in defensive win shares at 5.6 (along with 7.3 OWS for a total of 12.9 good for 5th in the league).
Quote from: Roy H. on May 26, 2011, 02:16:53 PMQuote from: mgent on May 26, 2011, 02:13:15 PMPetitt and Ewing were both guys I wanted, Petitt really.No problem with Hayes though. Roy, since you brought up which year, here's a question to the panelists: the fact that a player won the title in a certain year technically doesn't matter right? I mean it's not like we're putting them with the same team they had that year. I guess my real question is what matters more numbers (how they actually played) or awards?I'll probably look at playoff performances a bit, but winning a title isn't an automatic amplifier. That's fair.For the record who else has all champions on their team thus far?
Quote from: mgent on May 26, 2011, 02:13:15 PMPetitt and Ewing were both guys I wanted, Petitt really.No problem with Hayes though. Roy, since you brought up which year, here's a question to the panelists: the fact that a player won the title in a certain year technically doesn't matter right? I mean it's not like we're putting them with the same team they had that year. I guess my real question is what matters more numbers (how they actually played) or awards?I'll probably look at playoff performances a bit, but winning a title isn't an automatic amplifier.
Petitt and Ewing were both guys I wanted, Petitt really.No problem with Hayes though. Roy, since you brought up which year, here's a question to the panelists: the fact that a player won the title in a certain year technically doesn't matter right? I mean it's not like we're putting them with the same team they had that year. I guess my real question is what matters more numbers (how they actually played) or awards?
Quote from: Moranis on May 26, 2011, 02:40:21 PMSee start that wasn't so hard.Edgar isn't going to be happy as my string of MVP's will end with this pick.SG - Paul Pierce (01/02 season)Clear no-brainer for me at this point. Getting huge size at SG in a year when Pierce shot over 6 three's a game and hit over 40% of them, scored over 26 a game, and still had solid rebounding and passing numbers all as a SG (also played some time at SF giving my team a lot of roster flexibility). He was also an excellent defender that season with a DRTG below 100 and was actually 4th in the league in defensive win shares at 5.6 (along with 7.3 OWS for a total of 12.9 good for 5th in the league).Sweet! He was on my radar for a bit.
He was theeason why I dont like KGs and Ray Allens PickThe reason the Cs became champions was the Capitan and the Capitan only, our MVP
Quote from: Moranis on May 26, 2011, 02:40:21 PMSee start that wasn't so hard.Edgar isn't going to be happy as my string of MVP's will end with this pick.SG - Paul Pierce (01/02 season)Clear no-brainer for me at this point. Getting huge size at SG in a year when Pierce shot over 6 three's a game and hit over 40% of them, scored over 26 a game, and still had solid rebounding and passing numbers all as a SG (also played some time at SF giving my team a lot of roster flexibility). He was also an excellent defender that season with a DRTG below 100 and was actually 4th in the league in defensive win shares at 5.6 (along with 7.3 OWS for a total of 12.9 good for 5th in the league).That is a pretty interesting pick. Of the SG's left out there, we got multiple HOF'ers and even some Top 50 All-Time guys. This pick is pretty interesting though, because we now know that Pierce CAN be the kind of player you want on a title-team, so any immaturity questions are out the window. Really interesting pick.
Quote from: Edgar on May 26, 2011, 02:47:02 PMHe was theeason why I dont like KGs and Ray Allens PickThe reason the Cs became champions was the Capitan and the Capitan only, our MVPSo much for ubuntu.
I like the Pierce pick just not the year. Here is where I don't like Roy's thoughts on evaluating a player outside of that year. The year in question Pierce was an immature party person and was not the consummate team player or defender he would become. His Indiana playoff fiasco years later shows what I mean. 2007-08 Pierce, though he had worse stats, is a more mature and better all around player.
Chicago Bulls:All 4 players are NBA ChampionsAll 4 players are NBA Finals MVPsAll 4 players are 1st team All NBA playersAll 4 players are on the NBA Top 50 list of players3 players are NBA MVPs3 players are 1st team All Defensejust saying