|
|
Post by Face-in on Sept 6, 2016 13:28:53 GMT -6
Mike Smrek played in only 4 games since the last update and still made the top 10.  |
|
|
|
Post by Heebs on Sept 6, 2016 13:32:58 GMT -6
Tisdale at 3 and McDaniel NR is a joke.
This is exactly what you get from small-town presses like those found in New York City.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lazy Pete on Sept 6, 2016 13:49:34 GMT -6
I would also rate McDaniel as a top 5 player at least, but it seems like Eric has different criteria. I tended to favor guys who produced decently in big minutes over guys who produced well in small minutes.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2016 13:50:03 GMT -6
#bringbackpete
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 6, 2016 14:28:53 GMT -6
Tisdale at 3 and McDaniel NR is a joke. This is exactly what you get from small-town presses like those found in New York City. pts/tsa 1.08 Tisdale 1.02 McDaniel blks/36 1.5 Tisdale 0.6 McDaniel reb/36 11.2 Tisdale 10.2 McDaniel height 6'9" Tisdale 6'7" McDaniel Tisdale is better. It's not close. Just stop. |
|
|
|
Post by SugarShaun on Sept 6, 2016 14:33:40 GMT -6
1 player on the list is playing 23+ MPG
6 are < 20 MPG
3 < 10 MPG
|
|
|
|
Post by kn88 on Sept 6, 2016 14:58:08 GMT -6
it warms my heart to see that pedo fuckboy karl malone nowhere near this list. fuck you, karl.
(sorry shaun)
|
|
|
|
Post by Heebs on Sept 6, 2016 15:46:33 GMT -6
McDaniel is a SF. Tisdale is a big.
So an apples to apples comparison seems disingenuous and reeks of small town desperation.
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 6, 2016 16:36:00 GMT -6
McDanie is a SF. Tisdale is a big. Applying positional adjustments Tisdale still has more blocks, is one rebound per 36 behind instead of ahead, and is a massively better scorer at +.12 vs his position instead of -.06. There's more to the ladder than FG%. That's all there is to it.You're the one who brought it up... |
|
Trofie
Former GM 
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 1,812
Joined: April 2014
|
Post by Trofie on Sept 6, 2016 16:40:15 GMT -6
Agree with Eric.
|
|
|
|
Post by MistleTacoe on Sept 6, 2016 18:23:32 GMT -6
I'm also super curious how blocks matter but steals don't.
Its definitely just dumb that X-Man isn't in your top 10.....whatever your argument is.
|
|
|
|
Post by MistleTacoe on Sept 6, 2016 18:26:17 GMT -6
I would guess that everyone position 10 through 4 would trade their player in a heartbeat for X-Man. Just saying
|
|
|
|
Post by Cinco de Wardo on Sept 6, 2016 19:10:51 GMT -6
I would guess that everyone position 10 through 4 would trade their player in a heartbeat for X-Man. Just saying a Bill Simmons type trade value article would be outstanding. |
|
|
|
Post by SugarShaun on Sept 6, 2016 19:27:01 GMT -6
I would guess that everyone position 10 through 4 would trade their player in a heartbeat for X-Man. Just saying a Bill Simmons type trade value article would be outstanding. If someone did this and put the time in to do it correctly I would appeal for the commish to allow it to be worth more than 5k |
|
|
|
Post by MistleTacoe on Sept 6, 2016 19:54:50 GMT -6
a Bill Simmons type trade value article would be outstanding. If someone did this and put the time in to do it correctly I would appeal for the commish to allow it to be worth more than 5k I will do a 5k version this year....top 20 players in the league with regards to trade value. If the commish will allow for more than 5k to be allotted, I will do a larger version. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 6, 2016 20:24:33 GMT -6
I'm also super curious how blocks matter but steals don't. Steals do matter, as does Post Defense and Perimeter Defense which we can't see at all. It just turns out that blocks matter way more. That's just the way heavyreign built it.No one's made an argument for why he should be in, though. As a big he's a slightly above average scorer and horrible defender. As a wing he's a below average scorer and poor defender. His best prospects going forward given his three point shooting are as a big, but he's 6'7". No present, no future, no ladder. |
|
|
|
Post by Heebs on Sept 6, 2016 20:27:26 GMT -6
Archive it. X-man will be a much better long term player than whatever shitty big Eric put at three. I don't even remember that guys name. He sucks that much.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lazy Pete on Sept 6, 2016 21:04:42 GMT -6
Eric probably thought Larry kenon sucked too
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2016 21:06:06 GMT -6
I hope Xavier McDaniels has a long and very successful TMBSL career in spite of the hatred that eric has spewed in this article |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 6, 2016 21:14:45 GMT -6
Eric probably thought Larry kenon sucked too Larry Kenon who put up 1.11 pts/tsa his rookie year? smh pete |
|
|
|
Post by MistleTacoe on Sept 6, 2016 22:12:54 GMT -6
I'm also super curious how blocks matter but steals don't. Steals do matter, as does Post Defense and Perimeter Defense which we can't see at all. It just turns out that blocks matter way more. That's just the way heavyreign built it. No one's made an argument for why he should be in, though. As a big he's a slightly above average scorer and horrible defender. As a wing he's a below average scorer and poor defender. His best prospects going forward given his three point shooting are as a big, but he's 6'7".No present, no future, no ladder. Yes I have made the argument multiple times why he should be in. He's shooting 48%. Averaging 19/11 and 2spg as a rookie. 1.6 TOs per game. How do you know he's a horrible/poor defender? Are you going game by game and checking his match-ups or are you just going by blocks? You are saying things like "hes an above average scorer" and "he's a horrible defender" but what other players are you basing it off of? Because in terms of rookies, he's a top 3 scorer and rebounder. Top 10 (I assume) in efficiency....kind of moot because hes playing more than anyone else so he would probably be higher if everyone else was playing against starters and averaging 30+ minutes a game. Weird....he's just .5 steals off the top 10 in the LEAGUE in steals. The Warriors are bad. X-Man is a bright point. Your argument was funny for awhile....now I just don't trust your opinion This is my last post about it in this thread cause im beating a dead horse at this point. |
|
|
|
Post by ANK1990 on Sept 6, 2016 22:30:06 GMT -6
It's unreal the amount of hatred and bile X-Man has to put up with.
This is like Jackie Robinson's rookie year.
|
|
|
|
Post by 20s Navidad on Sept 7, 2016 5:54:53 GMT -6
If someone did this and put the time in to do it correctly I would appeal for the commish to allow it to be worth more than 5k I will do a 5k version this year....top 20 players in the league with regards to trade value. If the commish will allow for more than 5k to be allotted, I will do a larger version.  People have done that article with 50 guys multiple times in the past for a +5. Articles that myself, soup, Pete, Eric, etc have done have been at least as much work and we did them for 5000. |
|
|
|
Post by MistleTacoe on Sept 7, 2016 6:39:14 GMT -6
I will do a 5k version this year....top 20 players in the league with regards to trade value. If the commish will allow for more than 5k to be allotted, I will do a larger version. People have done that article with 50 guys multiple times in the past for a +5. Articles that myself, soup, Pete, Eric, etc have done have been at least as much work and we did them for 5000. Fair enough. I'll do the article regardless |
|
|
|
Post by Odin on Sept 7, 2016 7:12:16 GMT -6
Archive it. X-man will be a much better long term player than whatever shitty big Eric put at three. I don't even remember that guys name. He sucks that much. archiving |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 7, 2016 8:41:41 GMT -6
Yes I have made the argument multiple times why he should be in. He's shooting 48%. Averaging 19/11 and 2spg as a rookie. 1.6 TOs per game. How do you know he's a horrible/poor defender? Are you going game by game and checking his match-ups or are you just going by blocks? You are saying things like "hes an above average scorer" and "he's a horrible defender" but what other players are you basing it off of? Because in terms of rookies, he's a top 3 scorer and rebounder. Top 10 (I assume) in efficiency....kind of moot because hes playing more than anyone else so he would probably be higher if everyone else was playing against starters and averaging 30+ minutes a game. Weird....he's just .5 steals off the top 10 in the LEAGUE in steals. The Warriors are bad. X-Man is a bright point. Your argument was funny for awhile....now I just don't trust your opinion This is my last post about it in this thread cause im beating a dead horse at this point. FG% isn't an argument any more than FT% is an argument. If you want to actually see scoring efficiency you have to look at total points weighted by the number of FTAs relative to the number of FGAs. For the same reason, points isn't an argument. A guy who scores 15 points efficiently helps your team, a guy who score 20 points inefficiently hurts your team. As it turns out his efficiency is neither good nor top ten for rookies, that's the whole point: his scoring isn't a plus, it's a minus. (Unless you play him as a big, in which case his defense is a catastrophic minus.) There is no "playing against starters" effect because of the way the software does substitutions. Guys who play well as backups play well as starters, just look at Brent Price. On the other side of the ball, I go by blocks because blocks, for lack of a better term, are good. Blocks are right. Blocks work. This isn't something I just made up, this is settled science since before you were in the league. It's not personal - it literally can't possibly be. As for match-ups, you're not going to get very far arguing strength of schedule when you play in the West. He is a good rebounder, I've never disputed that. 1.6 turnovers a game isn't good. It's not bad, but it's not good. . So in order of what's most important, he's bad at scoring, bad at defense, okay at turnovers, good at rebounding. In this rookie class, that doesn't stack up. Everyone in the top ten is elite in at least one category except Smrek, who is good in three including the first two. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 9, 2016 9:53:53 GMT -6
Day 90 85 Update. 1. Patrick Ewing Rookies across the board hit a major wall shooting wise. Patrick is still above average for a big but he's dipping. Not that it matters, he could be shooting 40% from the field and he'd still be a plus big, which in this class makes him a cinch for #1. . 2. Mario Elie  He's not challenging Ewing but Elie was one of the very few rookies to go up in efficiency this go around. He's one of only two rookies to crack 1.1 pts/tsa, which though a relatively modest accomplishment combines with his excellent defense to make a legit starting caliber player. If he can goose his scoring volume he'll be a star, and a little more rebounding wouldn't hurt either. . 3. Wayman Tisdale It's a pretty sad rookie class when this bum is justifiably number three this deep in the season. Some of that is from better rookies not getting playing time (including on his own team), but still. He's a very good big man scorer, his rebounding is okay, his defense isn't completely unsalvageable. . 4. Detlef Schrempf  It's a really sad rookie class when this bum is number four by sheer process of elimination. Average scoring, very good rebounding, mediocre defense. The bones of a solid player are here, it's up to camps to flesh them out. . 5. Alredick Hughes  This'll be the last entry for Hughesy unless he gets more playing time, but he's a super elite scorer in a class full of poor ones, so I'm giving him the love one last time. . 6. Adrian Branch  He's got a great jump shot, elite shot blocking, and very good handling (tantalizing PG eligibility). The bad news is his inside scoring, rebounding, and three ball. All told his GM probably won't be able to make him a good scorer AND PG eligible without some dream inside/three training camps. . 7. Benoit Benjamin Has improved on his already very good d/r numbers, still shoots way too much. His pts/tsa is crawling towards average though, and with the defensive side set up some judicious camps (and some luck) could make a decent two way player out of Benny. The last player (getting minutes) that I think has any real potential in this class. . 8. Marcus Bol He's a good d/r big. . 9. Carey Scurry  20s' man finally scurries into the top ten. Has the reverse outside set-up of Adrian with great three point shooting and okay free throw shooting, which gives him better efficiency now but worse prospects going forward. His defense isn't up to Adrian's level but it's not horrible for a wing player, good rebounds and handling. I don't think he'll ever be a good starter but solid backup isn't out of the question. . 10. Trevor Nailon  A homeless man's Wayman Tisdale, Nailon at least has the appeal of the big man three ball. He's also got fantastic measureables. His rebounding is below average and his shot blocking is  but as a true PF he is SF eligible, so there's a worst case scenario where he's Schrempf with a turnover problem and lower volume. . Previously on list: Adultman, Smrek (out for no MP) Battle (efficiency took a nose dive)
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2016 10:25:49 GMT -6
Still no X-Man smdh
|
|
|
|
Post by MistleTacoe on Sept 9, 2016 11:48:54 GMT -6
I've been trying to move X-Man straight up for Trevor Nailon but MJ keeps telling me that Trevor Nailon is clearly a better player |
|
|
|
Post by SugarShaun on Sept 9, 2016 12:01:10 GMT -6
I've been trying to move X-Man straight up for Trevor Nailon but MJ keeps telling me that Trevor Nailon is clearly a better player It's been almost 48 hours. Where is my trade value column?!? |
|
but as a true PF he is SF eligible, so there's a worst case scenario where he's Schrempf with a turnover problem and lower volume.