|
|
Post by Lazy Pete on May 5, 2016 15:19:50 GMT -6
hahaha I just noticed Jeff Van Gundy in the Mourning photo in canes' signature
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 5, 2016 15:36:00 GMT -6
My job is to interpret words. I provide clients with interpretations of rules that allow them to truthfully say they merely applied the rules Congress or the Treasury department wrote. Often times those interpretations are strained at best. Another part of our job is to identify what the rules DON'T say. That is, what gaps, or glitches, are in the rules that allow our clients to take advantage of a rule in a way that the drafter never imagined let alone identified and blessed. When we are working in the "what don't the rules say" space, we always keep one thing in mind: Pigs get fat. Hogs get slaughtered. Epstein, combined with the hometown, combined with the 0/0/0, was a little too much. This isn't a question of what the rules don't say, though, or even of interpretation. Everything I did was explicitly allowed by the rules: that I could make a prospect with such and such grades, that I could pick his hometown, and that I could set him to 0/0/0. If you want to say that the drafter didn't fully understand the consequences of those explicitly allowed actions, nobody is disputing that. What I will continue to dispute until someone makes a cogent argument to the contrary is that I somehow bent the rules, or dodged or ran an end around or exploited or found a loophole, or did anything other than following the exact letter and spirit of the law. If you (in general) don't like something, that doesn't mean it's illegal. I dislike the tanking we allow to go on. Not an exploit. I dislike some of the trades we permit. Not an abuse of power. You (in general) dislike how Jesse would have signed with me if he reached free agency. Not cheating. Finally, Mark Cuban, I'm personally offended you would use a pork metaphor when talking about a fellow Hebrew.  |
|
|
|
Post by Heebs on May 5, 2016 15:45:24 GMT -6
The rules do not say that the creator cannot make the player 0/0/0 and hometown of the creating GM. That was an inadvertent oversight by the drafter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Face-in on May 5, 2016 15:48:52 GMT -6
My job is to interpret words. I provide clients with interpretations of rules that allow them to truthfully say they merely applied the rules Congress or the Treasury department wrote. Often times those interpretations are strained at best. Another part of our job is to identify what the rules DON'T say. That is, what gaps, or glitches, are in the rules that allow our clients to take advantage of a rule in a way that the drafter never imagined let alone identified and blessed. When we are working in the "what don't the rules say" space, we always keep one thing in mind: Pigs get fat. Hogs get slaughtered. Epstein, combined with the hometown, combined with the 0/0/0, was a little too much. This isn't a question of what the rules don't say, though, or even of interpretation. Everything I did was explicitly allowed by the rules: that I could make a prospect with such and such grades, that I could pick his hometown, and that I could set him to 0/0/0. If you want to say that the drafter didn't fully understand the consequences of those explicitly allowed actions, nobody is disputing that. What I will continue to dispute until someone makes a cogent argument to the contrary is that I somehow bent the rules, or dodged or ran an end around or exploited or found a loophole, or did anything other than following the exact letter and spirit of the law. If you (in general) don't like something, that doesn't mean it's illegal. I dislike the tanking we allow to go on. Not an exploit. I dislike some of the trades we permit. Not an abuse of power. You (in general) dislike how Jesse would have signed with me if he reached free agency. Not cheating. Finally, Mark Cuban, I'm personally offended you would use a pork metaphor when talking about a fellow Hebrew.  |
|
Bruns
Former GM 
Posts: 4,218
Likes: 1,025
Dump Bucks: 35,800
Joined: April 2014
|
Post by Bruns on May 5, 2016 16:00:04 GMT -6
Brunsgate didn't even get a thread.  |
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 5, 2016 16:04:24 GMT -6
The rules do not say that the creator cannot make the player 0/0/0 and hometown of the creating GM. That was an inadvertent oversight by the drafter. You might as well claim the rules do not say I can make a player 50/50/40 and therefore any 50/50/40 player is illegal, or 60/30/10, or a player with a hometown in my conference, or a player with a hometown in the other conference, or a player with a hometown starting with C. The rules don't say any of those things, and it would be just as ridiculous to make your argument in those cases as this. The rules give unbounded power to set hometown, that is all that needs to be said. The rules give unbounded power to set greed and loyalty, that is all that needs to be said. |
|
|
|
Post by Heebs on May 5, 2016 16:13:49 GMT -6
There is a glitch in the rules that no reasonable person would have allowed if they understood its ramifications. You identified and took advantage of it. I agree it was not outside of the rules. It clearly was not intended.
|
|
Bankz
Former GM
Posts: 7,254
Likes: 895
Dump Bucks: 18,475
Joined: April 2014
|
Post by Bankz on May 5, 2016 17:07:04 GMT -6
I think the best part of all this is the fact that Eric is such a cheap bastard that he wouldn't even offer fair value to move up in the draft to select his cheat code.
But that may be in part because he probably had a significant chance of landing him via FA anyways based on his research.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2016 17:22:51 GMT -6
I think the best part of all this is the fact that Eric is such a cheap bastard that he wouldn't even offer fair value to move up in the draft to select his cheat code. But that may be in part because he probably had a significant chance of landing him via FA anyways based on his research. No he just thinks that his mediocre players hold much higher value than they do |
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Cane on May 5, 2016 17:47:41 GMT -6
hahaha I just noticed Jeff Van Gundy in the Mourning photo in canes' signature Need someone to photoshop Eric's head onto JVG's head |
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 5, 2016 18:44:43 GMT -6
I think the best part of all this is the fact that Eric is such a cheap bastard that he wouldn't even offer fair value to move up in the draft to select his cheat code. But that may be in part because he probably had a significant chance of landing him via FA anyways based on his research. I think four firsts and three seconds is a legitimate offer, and I said in the post that he was likely to join me in free agency anyway. There is a glitch in the rules that no reasonable person would have allowed if they understood its ramifications. You identified and took advantage of it. I agree it was not outside of the rules. It clearly was not intended. Good enough for me. |
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Cane on May 5, 2016 18:46:24 GMT -6
I offered 4 firsts to move up from 1.3 to 1.2. Come on Eric
|
|
|
|
Post by Souper Troopers on May 5, 2016 18:55:35 GMT -6
My job is to interpret words. I provide clients with interpretations of rules that allow them to truthfully say they merely applied the rules Congress or the Treasury department wrote. Often times those interpretations are strained at best. Another part of our job is to identify what the rules DON'T say. That is, what gaps, or glitches, are in the rules that allow our clients to take advantage of a rule in a way that the drafter never imagined let alone identified and blessed. When we are working in the "what don't the rules say" space, we always keep one thing in mind: Pigs get fat. Hogs get slaughtered. Epstein, combined with the hometown, combined with the 0/0/0, was a little too much. This isn't a question of what the rules don't say, though, or even of interpretation. Everything I did was explicitly allowed by the rules: that I could make a prospect with such and such grades, that I could pick his hometown, and that I could set him to 0/0/0. If you want to say that the drafter didn't fully understand the consequences of those explicitly allowed actions, nobody is disputing that. What I will continue to dispute until someone makes a cogent argument to the contrary is that I somehow bent the rules, or dodged or ran an end around or exploited or found a loophole, or did anything other than following the exact letter and spirit of the law. If you (in general) don't like something, that doesn't mean it's illegal. I dislike the tanking we allow to go on. Not an exploit. I dislike some of the trades we permit. Not an abuse of power. You (in general) dislike how Jesse would have signed with me if he reached free agency. Not cheating. Finally, Mark Cuban, I'm personally offended you would use a pork metaphor when talking about a fellow Hebrew. I mean the fact that there's never been a player with his build(because it's unrealistic) and even yourself never making a prospect like this should be really telling. The problem is not the scoring grades you gave him. It's the fact that you exploited the flaws of the software my making a PG with extremely high handling and center like passing. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 6, 2016 8:35:33 GMT -6
I mean the fact that there's never been a player with his build(because it's unrealistic) and even yourself never making a prospect like this should be really telling. I've never made a player like Shaq either, though.I hear you, but how is that different from making a center with extremely high shot blocking and point guard like post defense? There are many PGs with ~6 assists per game. Kyrie pre-LeBron, Goran pre-Wade, Kemba, Lillard, George Hill, Conley. There hasn't been a player with >4 blocks in twenty years, nobody seems to care that Zo and Shaq are going to spend their whole careers doing that. And it's not like I hid anything about Jesse's Handling grade, he had a profile that explicitly said he had "sublime" handling and quickness. Even if I hadn't published the quantitative Handling grade formula, basic reasoning makes it clear that if he's great at two of the three things leading to a C- grade he must be terrible in the last one. |
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Cane on May 6, 2016 9:17:41 GMT -6
Eric, you exploited the flaws of the software to create a super human PG. an IRL PG with "5" handles should struggle to complete a pass, not put up 6ish assists and never turn the ball over. This isn't difficult.
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 6, 2016 10:10:07 GMT -6
Eric, you exploited the flaws of the software to create a super human PG. an IRL PG with "5" handles should struggle to complete a pass, not put up 6ish assists and never turn the ball over. This isn't difficult. But he didn't have F Handling, he had C- Handling. George Hill IRL put up about 5 assists to about 1.5 turnovers when PG13 wasn't around, I'm sure I could find other examples, and in the reverse case look at Magic Johnson IRL who once had 13 assists and 4.6 turnovers per game (high Passing attribute low Handling attribute). Any composite metric is going to have cases where one factor is very high and another is very low. If no one can explain how this is any more of an "exploit" than a center with high Shot Blocking and low Post Defense, why should I change my mind? |
|
|
|
Post by Souper Troopers on May 6, 2016 10:15:34 GMT -6
Real life assists doesn't equate with the software and you know this. 6 in real life is like 8-9 in this league. Jesse in my sim ahead season put up 4 and scored 44 points a game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Cane on May 6, 2016 10:22:24 GMT -6
Soup continually making great points
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 6, 2016 10:28:47 GMT -6
If no one can answer "how is that different from making a center with extremely high shot blocking and point guard like post defense?" then I don't think we have anything left to talk about.  |
|
|
|
Post by Heynong Man on May 6, 2016 10:30:05 GMT -6
You sound like the kids I teach man. You got caught own up to it and let's move on no need to keep arguing something that has been decided.
|
|
|
|
Post by Souper Troopers on May 6, 2016 10:30:58 GMT -6
If no one can answer "how is that different from making a center with extremely high shot blocking and point guard like post defense?" then I don't think we have anything left to talk about. Because one is fucking realistic you hard headed bastard. One doesn't completey take advantage of the heavyreign software. You can't really be this proud to be the only motherfucker to take this stance can you? And let's not hide the fact that you gave this "point guard" the highest of shot blocking grades. |
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Cane on May 6, 2016 10:40:00 GMT -6
I mean Dwyane Wade is arguably the best shot blocking guard of all time and at his peak he was averaging 1-1.3 blocks per game. Epstein was at 1.7 in preseason. Lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Souper Troopers on May 6, 2016 11:02:24 GMT -6
This is Eric's Alamo. Waterloo.
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 6, 2016 11:32:06 GMT -6
You sound like the kids I teach man. You got caught own up to it and let's move on no need to keep arguing something that has been decided. In what sense did I get "caught" doing the thing I publicly said I was going to do, then publicly said I had done? As I said, I did not think I was going to change anyone's mind here. I am responding to concerns raised by other members of this community because I think people warrant respect, and because I take the accusations made in this thread very seriously. If you don't care, nobody's forcing you to read it. Because one is fucking realistic you hard headed bastard. One doesn't completey take advantage of the heavyreign software. You can't really be this proud to be the only motherfucker to take this stance can you? And let's not hide the fact that you gave this "point guard" the highest of shot blocking grades. It is not realistic that a big with no idea how to play post defense is an elite defender. Using post defense and shot blocking to create a Defense grade takes advantage of the software exactly as much as using handling and passing to create a Handling grade. I have not disputed that Jesse Epstein had a high shot blocking grade; as his profile says, he is an excellent man defender. His profile has just as much right to high shot blocking as Shaquille O'Neal's. I mean Dwyane Wade is arguably the best shot blocking guard of all time and at his peak he was averaging 1-1.3 blocks per game. Epstein was at 1.7 in preseason. Lol I am honestly trying to understand the concerns here, not just yours but everyone's. The issue I have is that every argument you guys have made seems to be unevenly applied. For example, when I pointed out many real life players with Jesse's passing stats those stats didn't count, but when real life players don't have Jesse's defensive stats that does count. When I have a player with high Handling and low Passing that's an exploit, when you have a player with high Blocking and low Post Defense that's not. When I buy a reward to set hometown that's taking advantage of the system, when you buy a reward for Inside Scoring that's not. The common thread I see there is that when I do something it's wrong, when you do something it's not. Call me hard headed if you want, but I don't think I'm being unreasonable here. I get that you (all) make points you feel are very good, I'm just saying you don't seem to be considering how the defenses you offer for them outside of this situation apply just as well to this situation. |
|
|
|
Post by Souper Troopers on May 6, 2016 11:35:47 GMT -6
well i never did what you are claiming when making players. if that's something you did, then you'll have to take it up with yourself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Souper Troopers on May 6, 2016 11:37:05 GMT -6
"His profile has just as much right to high shot blocking as Shaquille O'Neal's."
and you've said some stupid shit on this forum, but this is among the top of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by dilworth on May 6, 2016 12:32:04 GMT -6
Please stop saying you were open about what Epstein would be when he was described as:
"going to be good with B+ B scoring grades" which implies he is going to be a good scorer because of his grades like a normal B+ B scorer would be, not because you're giving him 100 inside and strength.
"quirky build"
"sublime handle"
"defense is excellent"
"Even his strengths are in some ways weaknesses"
"struggles from NBA three point range"
"openly ignores other defensive fundamentals"
Now read the description of Latrell Sprewell:
"Sprewell is a jack of all trades type of SG that has huge potential"
"strong finisher at the rim and adds a steady jump shot to compliment his gifted athleticism."
"He is a decent passer and solid rebounder from the guard spot."
"Has the ability to guard the other team’s best wing while adding a couple steals."
In no way was Epstein described to be a player anywhere near the caliber that he is. If all 28 GMs did not decipher your words then the problem is not in our ability to read but in your ability to communicate. You downplayed how good he would be, gave him a shit handles grade, and put him in the most loaded draft all in hopes that he would fall to a spot that you could draft him at because you knew he would be the best player in the league. Stop playing dumb, it's shady and you know it. You got caught. We don't hate you.
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 6, 2016 13:11:43 GMT -6
Please stop saying you were open about what Epstein would be when he was described as: "going to be good with B+ B scoring grades" which implies he is going to be a good scorer because of his grades like a normal B+ B scorer would be, not because you're giving him 100 inside and strength. "quirky build" "sublime handle" "defense is excellent" "Even his strengths are in some ways weaknesses" "struggles from NBA three point range" "openly ignores other defensive fundamentals" Everything I said is true. Everything about his build is covered. He had 5 Drive Defense and 5 Post Defense, he had a very low Jumping attribute (which combined with his B+ grade necessarily meant he had high Inside Scoring and Strength), his build is quirky, he shot 33% from three in preseason, and so on and so on. "They also say that what those young bloods need to understand is that this game has always been, and will always be, about buckets."I put him in the most loaded draft because I was honestly worried people wouldn't think he was good enough to justify his grades, which in most years would be 1.1 worthy, and I was pretty tired of people criticizing my draft making. You may think that's ridiculous, that it's obvious Jesse was a #1 player, but everyone believes turnovers have gone up and that isn't true either so Your accusation doesn't make sense. If I had thought I could make him drop to me in the draft, I would have given him 100 Loyalty so he would be most likely to resign with me. I in fact gave him 0 Loyalty, which only makes sense if I expected someone else to draft him. In the time since making Jesse's profile I made moves exclusively to make my team better: buying draft picks, signing good free agents, bringing back good players, not signing tankers, spending on camps. This also makes no sense if I was trying to improve my chances in the draft. I didn't have this in mind at the time but I think you can agree I pre-emptively laid an extremely solid anti-tanking defense. If his build makes more sense for someone else to draft him, and I ran my team in such a way as to worsen my chances of drafting him, what sense does it make to accuse me of trying to make him fall? If you're going to accuse me of being shady you could at least have the courtesy to assume I'm not completely inept at it. I don't think people hate me. I think people are doing themselves, the league, and me a disservice by buying into the hype here. It's not about whether Jesse should have been changed or not, it's about maintaining a healthy environment. |
|
|
|
Post by Heebs on May 6, 2016 13:50:52 GMT -6
I think soup hot fixing the situation and giving you a refund was very healthy for the league.
Super players are not good for the league. People lost interest during the Thunder run. Since Soup stopped GMing the Thunder and Harrison was effectively stopped, the league has been great.
Epstein will be another super player, which will suck. But at least he will not be programmed to sign with one team and not another.
|
|
|
|
Post by dilworth on May 6, 2016 14:10:26 GMT -6
Please stop saying you were open about what Epstein would be when he was described as: "going to be good with B+ B scoring grades" which implies he is going to be a good scorer because of his grades like a normal B+ B scorer would be, not because you're giving him 100 inside and strength. "quirky build" "sublime handle" "defense is excellent" "Even his strengths are in some ways weaknesses" "struggles from NBA three point range" "openly ignores other defensive fundamentals" Everything I said is true. Everything about his build is covered. He had 5 Drive Defense and 5 Post Defense, he had a very low Jumping attribute (which combined with his B+ grade necessarily meant he had high Inside Scoring and Strength), his build is quirky, he shot 33% from three in preseason, and so on and so on. "They also say that what those young bloods need to understand is that this game has always been, and will always be, about buckets."I put him in the most loaded draft because I was honestly worried people wouldn't think he was good enough to justify his grades, which in most years would be 1.1 worthy, and I was pretty tired of people criticizing my draft making. You may think that's ridiculous, that it's obvious Jesse was a #1 player, but everyone believes turnovers have gone up and that isn't true either so Your accusation doesn't make sense. If I had thought I could make him drop to me in the draft, I would have given him 100 Loyalty so he would be most likely to resign with me. I in fact gave him 0 Loyalty, which only makes sense if I expected someone else to draft him. In the time since making Jesse's profile I made moves exclusively to make my team better: buying draft picks, signing good free agents, bringing back good players, not signing tankers, spending on camps. This also makes no sense if I was trying to improve my chances in the draft. I didn't have this in mind at the time but I think you can agree I pre-emptively laid an extremely solid anti-tanking defense. If his build makes more sense for someone else to draft him, and I ran my team in such a way as to worsen my chances of drafting him, what sense does it make to accuse me of trying to make him fall? If you're going to accuse me of being shady you could at least have the courtesy to assume I'm not completely inept at it. I don't think people hate me. I think people are doing themselves, the league, and me a disservice by buying into the hype here. It's not about whether Jesse should have been changed or not, it's about maintaining a healthy environment. My point is not that you said anything untrue. My point is that what you said would lead no one to believe Epstein was going to be created the way he was created. You left breadcrumbs and are acting like they're interstate road signs. |
|
