|
|
Post by ucfinfan86 on Oct 3, 2018 13:18:23 GMT
I'm surprised to see Whitney so high. I hope I didn't sell short on him
|
|
|
|
Post by Charles on Oct 3, 2018 13:29:26 GMT
.1 bpg Jim Tucker is #20 because he has B handling as a big... Ok then. I don’t know what you’re even saying here. Are you mad he’s too low or too high? .1 BPG is pretty bad but yeah, he’s B defense so you could look at that as being a good thing: he might be an awesome post defender. Or he could be high in drive defense and basically be useless as a defender all together. Without scouts you really can’t tell. The handles inflate him a little bit.. like from the average big handle rating, maybe “1ish” in the overall department. So you could drop him down to #25 or something if you felt that you didn’t want to include the handles boost. You could just take him off your board completely if you didn’t value handles at all though. |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 3, 2018 14:05:39 GMT
.1 bpg Jim Tucker is #20 because he has B handling as a big... Ok then. I don’t know what you’re even saying here. Are you mad he’s too low or too high? .1 BPG is pretty bad but yeah, he’s B defense so you could look at that as being a good thing: he might be an awesome post defender. Or he could be high in drive defense and basically be useless as a defender all together. Without scouts you really can’t tell. The handles inflate him a little bit.. like from the average big handle rating, maybe “1ish” in the overall department. So you could drop him down to #25 or something if you felt that you didn’t want to include the handles boost. You could just take him off your board completely if you didn’t value handles at all though. Different guy. B inside and B rebounding with C defense. |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 3, 2018 14:09:35 GMT
Also that's how it works in real life. This is meant to be a consensus. The overall scouting report if you will. But teams will completely eliminate guys from their boards based on scheme fit or their own team beliefs and biases even when the consensus is high.
|
|
|
|
Post by vanimmer on Oct 3, 2018 14:10:34 GMT
i guess my draft was pretty good
|
|
|
|
Post by Charles on Oct 3, 2018 14:15:11 GMT
Also that's how it works in real life. This is meant to be a consensus. The overall scouting report if you will. But teams will completely eliminate guys from their boards based on scheme fit or their own team beliefs and biases even when the consensus is high. like how I’d immediately remove the #2 and #8 from my board just based on them being wings with under C+ outside as the start point. Lol. Bad experiences with that personally. |
|
|
|
Post by naterade on Oct 3, 2018 14:52:28 GMT
Def still happy with my pick after seeing this analysis. There were potentially 3 better SF's statistically speaking, but I needed a 2, and with Greer gone, Jones was the only choice!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 3, 2018 15:19:58 GMT
Def still happy with my pick after seeing this analysis. There were potentially 3 better SF's statistically speaking, but I needed a 2, and with Greer gone, Jones was the only choice!! Yeah it was the right pick. Even w/o Baylor, I like the SFs but they all have to overcome the same issue so still think Jones was the right pick |
|
|
|
Post by naterade on Oct 3, 2018 15:25:37 GMT
Def still happy with my pick after seeing this analysis. There were potentially 3 better SF's statistically speaking, but I needed a 2, and with Greer gone, Jones was the only choice!! Yeah it was the right pick. Even w/o Baylor, I like the SFs but they all have to overcome the same issue so still think Jones was the right pick I hope Jones' talents with outside shooting and defense mix well with Baylors inside scoring and rebounding.. could be a fierce tandem if they stick together!! |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 4, 2018 3:00:02 GMT
Hornets $200
Magic $200
Clippers $5
Lakers $5
Sonics $5
Wizards $5
Spurs $5
Nets $5
Nuggets $5
Celtics $5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 4, 2018 3:00:45 GMT
Added
|
|
*
*