The 54 Pick MLB, NFL, NBA Super Draft : CHAT

[Shanemansj13]

THe Grove/Lebron trade was awful and I ranked UK lower in baseball because his biggest strength is something I care the least about in these (Bullpens).

His staff was still the best arguably and his lineup was one of the best.

 

[CitySushi]

THe Grove/Lebron trade was awful and I ranked UK lower in baseball because his biggest strength is something I care the least about in these (Bullpens).

Bullpen I agree on its own should be weighed a little differently, but if you go with an elite pitching staff, an elite BP is absolutely required IMO.

UK had one of the best staff's in combination with a great BP and that should be factored in. On top of that his roster was composed of a lot of elite high average hitters who could produce runs. I thought that was deserving of the 1st spot in baseball, IMO.

 

[Shanemansj13]

But there is not much of a difference ever in these mocks. It’s all relative. Being 5th best is still being 5th best. Even if you are so close.

Yeah but still a 6 point difference? I don't mind changing it up where the top 2-3 gets more points and the top 2-3 losers get negative or zero points though...

1st - 13 points
2nd - 11 points
3rd - 9 points
4th - 7 points
5th - 5 points
6th - 3 points
7th - 1 points
8th - 0 points
9th - -1 point
10th - -2 point

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Bullpen I agree on its own should be weighed a little differently, but if you go with an elite pitching staff, an elite BP is absolutely required IMO.

UK had one of the best staff's in combination with a great BP and that should be factored in. On top of that his roster was composed of a lot of elite high average hitters who could produce runs. I thought that was deserving of the 1st spot in baseball, IMO.

I had uk 2nd or third. Don’t remember.

When I was ranking, his offense was like 7th best. But his pitching staff was SPECIAL. I always give boosts to special.

 

[Hall]

I had his offense middle of the pack because of the lack of overall power, and addie joss and don drysdale don't do it for me so his rotation was I believe 3rd or 4th.

 

[CitySushi]

@MilkSpiller22

The people that accumulated the most talent were towards the top over fit and it's just how people vote.

I am sure most people had Nos basketball team #1 because it's the best collection of talent, but the fit is awful relativel to Sushi or Shanes. But the talent wins out enough I had him 3rd.

You said you had him towards the bottom in Football, but I felt his was one of the most well built and would handle lots of situations. He also didn't have many OBVIOUS pitfalls like John Abraham as a 3-4 end, Chad Brown starting in this level of comp, or massive cowboys love.

I'm all about fit too. Been preaching it since day 1 of the basketball mocks that I took place in.

That said, I don't see any real fit issues with Nos team. There might have been one or two different ancillary players that could have helped him but as a unit it was an entirely cohesive roster.

He had enough shooter, rebounders, defenders, passers, etc. Magic and Lebron are two all time great passers but with Lebron being a better scorer, Magic could alleviate some of that ball handling pressure from Lebron which could open things up for him. Additionally you had Dirk there to space the floor and a great weakside slasher/scorer in Drexler.

Then off the bench you got a guy like Joe Dumars who was an all time great defender who was a 38% 3 point shooter. McHale, another all time great defensive PF to sub in for Dirk situationally. Tiny wasn't the greatest fit, I'd probably have gone Price, but with the way his roster is constructed, you'd probably have one of Lebron or Magic in the game at all times. Alex English a great all time wing scorer. Then he added Dale Ellis just for situational shooting later in games.

I thought overall it was a really cohesive roster. Lots of options to go big or small. Lots of options to floor space and great all time passers. Ability to put a fantastic defensive roster on the court.

 

[Shanemansj13]

I'm all about fit too. Been preaching it since day 1 of the basketball mocks that I took place in.

That said, I don't see any real fit issues with Nos team. There might have been one or two different ancillary players that could have helped him but as a unit it was an entirely cohesive roster.

He had enough shooter, rebounders, defenders, passers, etc. Magic and Lebron are two all time great passers but with Lebron being a better scorer, Magic could alleviate some of that ball handling pressure from Lebron which could open things up for him. Additionally you had Dirk there to space the floor and a great weakside slasher/scorer in Drexler.

Then off the bench you got a guy like Joe Dumars who was an all time great defender who was a 38% 3 point shooter. McHale, another all time great defensive PF to sub in for Dirk situationally. Tiny wasn't the greatest fit, I'd probably have gone Price, but with the way his roster is constructed, you'd probably have one of Lebron or Magic in the game at all times. Alex English a great all time wing scorer. Then he added Dale Ellis just for situational shooting later in games.

I thought overall it was a really cohesive roster. Lots of options to go big or small. Lots of options to floor space and great all time passers. Ability to put a fantastic defensive roster on the court.

Yep that's the only reason I had him above you barely and Hall. My top 3 teams, also had 500 in the mix. He had a ton of talent but the fit actually worked out well too. The Drexler pick was the only one I wasn't crazy about but he I wouldn't say it was a bad pick or anything. I don't see many fit issues with his team. Grabbing McHale before I did really hurt

 

[Hall]

While I respect your opinion, I think consistently yours and shanes team would get the better. Obviously Magic, Wilt, and Lebron can beat anyone but shooting does matter in todays game and you guys have it much more consistently.

If you are able to stop the fast breaks, there could be some slow spells.

 

[Nosferatu]

Yeah but still a 6 point difference? I don't mind changing it up where the top 2-3 gets more points and the top 2-3 losers get negative or zero points though...

1st - 13 points
2nd - 11 points
3rd - 9 points
4th - 7 points
5th - 5 points
6th - 3 points
7th - 1 points
8th - 0 points
9th - -1 point
10th - -2 point

I just don't think scoring like this will make much difference, we all probably rank the top couple teams the same and probably the lowest teams the same then the middle 6 or so teams are all mixed up so a scoring system like this wouldn't change anything.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I'm all about fit too. Been preaching it since day 1 of the basketball mocks that I took place in.

That said, I don't see any real fit issues with Nos team. There might have been one or two different ancillary players that could have helped him but as a unit it was an entirely cohesive roster.

He had enough shooter, rebounders, defenders, passers, etc. Magic and Lebron are two all time great passers but with Lebron being a better scorer, Magic could alleviate some of that ball handling pressure from Lebron which could open things up for him. Additionally you had Dirk there to space the floor and a great weakside slasher/scorer in Drexler.

Then off the bench you got a guy like Joe Dumars who was an all time great defender who was a 38% 3 point shooter. McHale, another all time great defensive PF to sub in for Dirk situationally. Tiny wasn't the greatest fit, I'd probably have gone Price, but with the way his roster is constructed, you'd probably have one of Lebron or Magic in the game at all times. Alex English a great all time wing scorer. Then he added Dale Ellis just for situational shooting later in games.

I thought overall it was a really cohesive roster. Lots of options to go big or small. Lots of options to floor space and great all time passers. Ability to put a fantastic defensive roster on the court.

JMO, I get fit and all... But I feel like sometimes we over evaluate on fit... Sure we all know what we are talking about... But chemistry and making a team fit should not be an excuse to draft bad(relative to the draft) players... and just because player A and player B would likely not have chemistry on the field or court(depending on the sport), doesn't mean defending these players is NOW EASY....

using a football example so I can make more sense to myself... We are sticklers for keeping a left whatever playing left whatever... Do you really think if I had Anthony Munoz and Willie Roaf that I would be BAD OFF?? just because they both play the same position, doesn't mean they cant play a similar postion… or similar game on the other side....

 

[Hall]

Well Willie Roaf started as a Right Tackle, it's why he has good value. He proved it.

But no I don't think Munoz would have a problem.

But there are plenty examples of people not making it on one side or the other.

 

[Shanemansj13]

JMO, I get fit and all... But I feel like sometimes we over evaluate on fit... Sure we all know what we are talking about... But chemistry and making a team fit should not be an excuse to draft bad(relative to the draft) players... and just because player A and player B would likely not have chemistry on the field or court(depending on the sport), doesn't mean defending these players is NOW EASY....

using a football example so I can make more sense to myself... We are sticklers for keeping a left whatever playing left whatever... Do you really think if I had Anthony Munoz and Willie Roaf that I would be BAD OFF?? just because they both play the same position, doesn't mean they cant play a similar postion… or similar game on the other side....

I don't think LT or RT is the same as say playing a PF or C at SF. Huge difference imo

But you are right fit isn't everything but when you are deciding the top 3 teams and it's close...that's when it does matter most

 

[Hall]

But you are right fit isn't everything but when you are deciding the top 3 teams and it's close...that's when it does matter most

Yup. Why I went the way I did in NBA.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I don't think LT or RT is the same as say playing a PF or C at SF. Huge difference imo

But you are right fit isn't everything but when you are deciding the top 3 teams and it's close...that's when it does matter most

Just used it as an example. Would have been better to go straight at 3-4 vs 4-3. I don’t think playing a stud is ever a bad thing. Even if he is slightly out of position. To think that he can’t do it is a joke. Sure he might not have the value he would have at his given postion. But do you really think Lawrence Taylor would have been a BAD 4-3 linebacker??

Wouldn’t you rather have him than some others taken?? Sure I get 3-4 linebacker is closer to a DE. but still.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Just used it as an example. Would have been better to go straight at 3-4 vs 4-3. I don’t think playing a stud is ever a bad thing. Even if he is slightly out of position. To think that he can’t do it is a joke. Sure he might not have the value he would have at his given postion. But do you really think Lawrence Taylor would have been a BAD 4-3 linebacker??

Wouldn’t you rather have him than some others taken?? Sure I get 3-4 linebacker is closer to a DE. but still.

Of course he wouldn't be a bad 4-3 LB but his strength is rushing the passer and pressuring the QB. Don't you want that full potential from a player you draft. If you get him in the 3rd round...fine put him in a 4-3 but I just don't see the point. I know it was just an example but why not play your players to the best of their abilities. There are times where you are kind of forced to and I don't have a huge problem with it, never really did

 

[Hall]

LT would more than likely be a wide-9 DE in a 4-3.

You could get away with him as a Strongside linebacker that could proide good run stopping.

Bun run stopping is less valuable then it was and Marshall Faulk, LT, and obviously some TE's would eat him up

 

[femurov]

I missed the part where our NBA teams were just the starters and not 2 halves. I never saw that it had changed until the end and I build my team so that I would have a lot of depth and 2 decent squads instead of a couple of mega stars, since I missed out on them.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Of course he wouldn't be a bad 4-3 LB but his strength is rushing the passer and pressuring the QB. Don't you want that full potential from a player you draft. If you get him in the 3rd round...fine put him in a 4-3 but I just don't see the point. I know it was just an example but why not play your players to the best of their abilities. There are times where you are kind of forced to and I don't have a huge problem with it, never really did

again... just an example... Point is that some voters penalize too heavily for wrong position... Of course if your first pick is LT, you will surround him to play where he is best...

it bothers me more that people use the 3-4 just so they don't have to get the elite names, more than playing a player in the wrong format...

 

[Shanemansj13]

again... just an example... Point is that some voters penalize too heavily for wrong position... Of course if your first pick is LT, you will surround him to play where he is best...

it bothers me more that people use the 3-4 just so they don't have to get the elite names, more than playing a player in the wrong format...

If system is the issue make a draft where you are required to play in one only system, I don't really get that argument. I don't really know why picking a system is an issue...if people pick 4-3 LB's too early (it happens quite a bit), the alternative is to go 3-4 or just build the DL first. It just makes sense, especially if their main focus is on secondary, OL or offense early in the draft.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

If system is the issue make a draft where you are required to play in one only system, I don't really get that argument. I don't really know why picking a system is an issue...if people pick 4-3 LB's too early (it happens quite a bit), the alternative is to go 3-4 or just build the DL first. It just makes sense, especially if their main focus is on secondary, OL or offense early in the draft.

No, I don't have a problem with going 3-4 or 4-3... it is your choice to do so... im saying that people use 3-4 as an excuse to get lesser players, and we just look at it as its ok, because its good fit... If you have lesser players then you have lesser players...

it goes back to my we care too much about fit point... if you have lesser players that fit, that is not better than having elite players that don't fit... At least IMO...

I just think we overthink things sometimes...

Its not just 3-4 vs 4-3, it is also CB vs Safety... or playing on the right side or the left side... Or being an offensive guard or tackle... sure it matters... but when jobs are similar, then the elites would still be elite playing that similar position...