#SLOE: People's Basketball Sim League

1. Let’s start with a draft-related question. We’re two season into the new college sim league draft class imports, and we are already seeing a mix of oddly skilled guys, short forwards, and low conditioned players, but we’re also introducing a lot of interesting prospects into the league like Kenneth Henderson, Vernon Desantis, and Gustave Lecroix. What are your thoughts on this new system? Is it working about how you expected? Do you wish we could have gone a different route than college?

GM JNR; Minnesota Timberwolves: I don’t think it’s been ideal so far, but I don’t know if that means college wasn’t the way to go. I just think this college import had some weird players. I think as time goes on, it will balance out. And honestly it may change some things, like drafting y/g 22 year olds who will be more productive coming out of college. I’m not worried yet.

GM ballsohard; Philadelphia 76ers: I really like college imports. Having some randomness seems odd, but this is a semi-strategy based game. I think the college game brings a little bit of freshness to the league in terms of that. The 6'6" SG is now a real gem to find, and you could see that by last draft when LeCroix went #1 overall. The 6'10" PF is a real advantage who was taken #1 overall in this draft. I find this as a closer representation to RL. The fact that we now have some bigs who can move the ball around and shoot makes things pretty interesting as well. There was some hesitation on talent pool, but frankly I think we're seeing as much if not more overall talent hit the league, but not as many of the OP talent like AD / Love/ ETc (all TC boost as well) which is a good thing.

GM InnerGI; New York Knicks: I've been pretty disappointed with the college draft files so far. The college system was definitely the right choice for the league because it is fun to watch players before they enter the league. However, I don't think the players coming into the league are good enough. Ken Hen, Desantis, and others are great prospects, but any player with current ratings of 20s or 30s (even 40s) won't see the court for a long time.

If we did the math for someone like Jeffrey Duren the IR prodigal son. He currently has: HND: 43, PAS: 41, PRD: 38, 3PS: 50. You can't start of even play a PG like that and that is after one decent TC. If Duren wants to become a quality or max level PG in the league, he'll need AT LEAST 2-3 perfect training camps where is he is gaining 5-10 points in each of those categories. I think that is just a hard pill to swallow for the teams building through the draft now. You'll have to match a max on a guy that has yet to produce in a meaningful way.

GM IamQuailMan; Milwaukee Bucks: There was a lot of excitement with the new draft system, using the NCAA league as a player farm. And as with every new system, there is always a list of pros and cons.

Let's start with the pros:
a) More depth in drafts than we've ever seen before. Picks between 17-30 actually have some value now in that you can snag a decent although obviously flawed role player.
b) Return to big man basketball. We've had a resurgence of inside scoring bigs. From my count there were over 40 players with AT LEAST B potential INS scoring in this draft.
c) Mystery of draft file looms through end of season. Unlike in previous seasons, we now have no idea how these draft files will look, which could potentially help mitigate all-out tanking. There always will be a team or three that bottom out, but look at the parity from this past season as proof of uncertainty forcing teams to compete.

Now onto the cons:
a) Long-game development. Very few ready now, win now prospects in these classes. Most will take a minimum of 2-3 seasons even before that can compete at a somewhat elevated level. Very possible some of these star potential players may be on their 2nd contract before having a meaningful impact for their team.
b) Less 3-pt shooting. 3pt shooting is going to start to become a premium in this league if the last 2 drafts are any indicator of what's to come.
c) Weird ass players. Look at 6'5" SF Russell Archenaga on the Kings who has the potentials to be a star, but unfortunately wears cement filled shoes that are 4 sizes too big. Many big players who rebound but cant defend, defend but cant rebound. Guards who cant handle or pass but has good PSD. None of this is really "new" to the league, but we are seeing it a lot more in these new players coming out than we had before.

All in all, the new draft system is a breath of fresh air, although in the future teams will really need to get creative with how they built their squads around the unique specimens coming out.

GM LoCo89; VanMemphis Grizzles: While through 2 drafts we're not getting the players I thought we might, I don't not like it. The conditioning is an issue, but I like that we're getting a bit more randomization in skills for players. It allows for more trial and combinations of players around the league as opposed to everyone looking for one of a couple of builds. I'm happy with the way we went and think it'll be interesting to see how the league looks as the real players thin out.


GM NOLa.; Sacramento Kings: Going to give the point to Doug here since he gave out a good list of good and bad and actually knows who Russel Arciniega is. I do think randomness is a good thing as it keeps things fresh, but once these player become the norm of talent it can be shocking for the league. Training camp is the cruel mistress that really kills out dreams when we’re most vulnerable, so hopefully it doesn’t compound the talent disparity.


2. Restricted free agency has come and gone. Which teams do you feel had a good showing (not your own), and which teams do you feel regressed (you can include your own)?

GM ballsohard; Philadelphia 76ers: I think the Bulls had a lot of fun with the process and overall ended up where they wanted to be by the end of it. They had the full spectrum of getting 2 players, getting a signing declined, and also losing a player. Overall, they got 2 solid PFs, lost a way overpaid PG and C. They key will be to retain Gallo, because this is all a huge waste of time without him after they made the terrible mistake of trading Harden.

GM InnerGI; New York Knicks: The Hawks had a nice showing. They got Middleton for a nice value, and they made trades to acquire Ed Davis and Afflalo for peanuts before the moratorium. Honorable mention to the Bulls for insuring max quality players like AD received a max, and he managed to pick up two big men (albeit overpaid).

Based solely on RFA, I don't think any team regressed, but the big movers this offseason have been the Wizards. They are clearly rebuilding after trading Tyreke for a trio of 7 footers (Bynum, Biggs, and Sullivan). I'm not sure I agree with building through the draft (see answer to #1).

GM IamQuailMan; Milwaukee Bucks: Winners of RFA: Bulls (filled out roster with decent mid-level contracts), Mavericks (Bradley Beal, nuff said), and Hawks (Basically ran back his team from last year, except a more expensive version). Losers of RFA: Pistons (no 5th year for AD), Warriors (Beverly is good, but his contract 2 seasons from now is not), and Nuggets (I like the match of Drummond, but he needs points invested into him via training, and I just don't think the Nuggets can do that right now).

GM LoCo89; VanMemphis Grizzles: I think it's really hard to "win" RFA. But I think if your goal was to go out and get young talent it's hard to say a team attained that goal more than the Bulls. And bonus to them, they didn't hugely overpay guys, which is what we usually see when players leave in RFA. As for a step back, I think it's probably the Nuggets, if only because it seems like he is unhappy with the Andre Drummond max (which I think is fine) and "having" to match it. Hard to say you didn't take a step back if it looks like you did something you didn't want to.

GM JNR; Minnesota Timberwolves: Obviously the teams that kept their players like the Mavs and Hawks had a good showing. They exhibited cost control and kept good players. I liked the aggressiveness of the Bulls, even though it didn’t turn out the way they wanted to, they were able to get some decent talent. I didn’t like the Bazemore contract or the Drummond contract, so I don’t like matching those, but I don’t think that means either team regressed because of matching.

GM NOLa.; Sacramento Kings: Point awarded to JNR, but I don’t agree with the declining of Bazemore. Hawks and Mavs were able to secure their RFA’s at comfortable salaries, and Beal I felt was the best signing of the period.

3. Personal foul training is becoming a semi-hot topic. 5 point increase for a flat fee of 12 points, with the only minimum requirement be that the player is averaging at least 3 fouls per game, do you think the training is good as it is, or should more tweaking be involved?

GM InnerGI; New York Knicks: It's terrible. It adds almost no impact for 12 points spent. I was an advocate of waiting to see how it worked before we jumped the gun on changing it two seasons ago, but it's clear. A 5 point change to foul rating is not worth the investment. Not even close.

GM IamQuailMan; Milwaukee Bucks: Personal Foul training should have been tweaked before it was implemented, in my opinion. I was vocal about how a 5pt rating uptick is not going to be worthwhile at all. Scott had a big proposal in the volunteer box section that was not bad, but I understand not wanting to do huge incremental gains (Wig's concern). Darth was the voice of reason that pretty much speaks to something that everyone agrees on: do we really need another game-imposed thing we cannot control (or see) ruining a good prospect. I had proposed something like 10-pt increase at the cost of 15 points, which could be a fair middle ground. It may not be the best middle ground, but something needs to give.

GM LoCo89; VanMemphis Grizzles: I think we don't have enough information on how the increases in foul rating affects foul rate. It makes the feeling out process frustrating, especially on teams that are trying to make use of the training. Considering most GMs don't really have a concept of what the rating is (or that it exists) or a baseline understanding of what good and bad ratings are, I think we should continue to tweak it until it makes a significant difference.

GM JNR; Minnesota Timberwolves: The training is pretty useless in my opinion. I used it once for Favors and didn’t feel like it made a significant difference. I think it should be tweaked for sure and support the suggestions that Ballsohard made.

GM ballsohard; Philadelphia 76ers: Oh Lord, you know I'm going to have a lot to say on it. I think the best argument for Paid training is , we play for fun, and guys that cant stay on the court aren't fun. 5 on the foul rating doesn't really do much as we've seen in practice. This is no shot at the original plan, but like we do in this league.. we see something not working and adjust. Not only that, this rating is hidden and its just shitty to hide that. The college to pro league argument is completely invalid since there's no 1 to 1 in the import process due to randomization. Not only that, but the original plan worked so poorly it was used twice and both players had to be traded bc it was that useless.

After discussion and thinking long and hard about it this is what I think it should be:
-No player should have below a 25 rating in foul
-There should be no limitation on the 30 mpg and 3 fouls since we don't have this limitation on any training. If someone wants to increase it and pay for it, why are we limiting them?
-Foul training should be a boost of 10 points (instead of 5) and cost about 20 points (negotiable)

GM NOLa.; Sacramento Kings: Point to ballsohard, I don’t like the 3 fpg minimum to be able to train this area, it doesn’t make sense if you have young players, especially undeveloped players, that don’t play enough minutes to get the fouls needed to train.


4. In the 2011-2012 season (5 seasons ago) the salary cap was set at $75,462,408, up a little over six million when the salary cap in 2010-2011 was $69,256,730. The salary cap this current season is $83,162,581, just under an eight million increase over five whole seasons. How has this impacted the league and your team’s strategy when bidding on players or trading for players?

GM IamQuailMan; Milwaukee Bucks: The cap increases have DEFINITELY impacted the league. People throwing out 10-12.5% increases on contracts in the past were banking on 2-4mil/yr cap jumps. However, those days are long gone. Perhaps they will return eventually. I think it's also causing many teams to be more thrifty in RFA/UFA. Not nearly as many maxes going around. In terms of team management, teams are also having to blow it up a season too soon for fear of tax implications (coughmecough).

GM LoCo89; VanMemphis Grizzles: Personally, while however misguided with dollar amount, I've always tried to play with the percentage increases and I think we'll start to see a lot more of players getting less than the 10% increases. So nothing's really changed there for the Grizz. For the league though I find that we're seeing a lot more of that particular manipulation. As more teams dabble in the tax each year than not, it'll be interesting to see how teams look to reduce their taxes each year as it looks like more and more of the space is gobbled up.

GM JNR; Minnesota Timberwolves: It changes a lot because tax looms overhead. Raises become big factors now. In prior years it was always automatic in my head to give a 10% raise every year, but now with the incremental changes in cap it doesn’t seem smart. I think we should consider signing a fake TV deal that bumps the cap up by about $8-10M in the next few years, possibly around the time my team can fit two or three max free agents.

GM ballsohard; Philadelphia 76ers: Really I think the min-15 M contract become so valuable. We're starting to see an adjustment to RFA bids due to the lack of increases or through the lack of cap bc of the increases. I think we're going to start seeing the non max RFA guys get traded a lot and hopefully a little bit better balance of talent in the league. There will of course be the people who don't pay attention and max and of course the occasional max to make someone make a tough decision; but smart teams will start learning to decline and use cap strat to win.

GM InnerGI; New York Knicks: It's a huge impact. Contracts with 10% increases are risky at the moment, but I don't think the league has adjusted or realized it yet. For me, it hasn't changed my strategy too much. My stance has always been to get your top 2-3 guys on max deals or close to it, and to try and have a backlog of up-and-comers that could garnish mid-level deals (i.e Bazemore, Middleton, Beverly, and Henson). I think mid-range salaries have inherit value outside of on the court production, and if the cap doesn't change, deals without 10% increases will be even more valuable.

GM NOLa.; Sacramento Kings: I wanted to give Louie a point here but then I’m not really sure if admitting to be misguided is worth a point. Everyone else said the same thing, which I agree with. The cap increases have been so minimal over the last few seasons that it has changed the way I view contracts, especially for those mid-level guys that aren’t max players, but are still solid starters on your team.

5. We have guys like Kevin Durant, DeAndre Jordan, and Derrick Rose who are hitting the UFA list. Pick one player who you feel has the highest chance to not return to the team the player was previously on and why?

GM LoCo89; VanMemphis Grizzles: While it's always hard to predict that big free agent that will leave, and I personally think all 3 of these guys will stay, if I'm picking one it's DeAndre. While I think it's easy to say Bow will just run it all back it's harder to figure out what the league does with an almost entirely defensively oriented player. Especially one that is a monster on that end.

GM JNR; Minnesota Timberwolves: I feel like DeAndre Jordan should find a new home. Gobert and Jordan together is an interesting idea but I don’t know if it’s practical, and maybe Bow won’t offer a 5 year which will allow other offers to look more enticing. As much as it would not benefit my team, I’d kind of love to see the Suns sign both Durant and Rose. It’d be nuts to see what kind of team that would be.

GM ballsohard; Philadelphia 76ers: I think i'll go DeAndre Jordan. Jordan was the Finals MVP in Bow's only title that counts and he definitely wants defense. But he also sometimes like to work as a GM who thinks he's smarter than the rest of the room. I pick Jordan not bc I think Bow wont 5 year max him, but I think he's got the highest odds to try and do something cute and have his cake and eat it too.

GM InnerGI; New York Knicks: I think there is a 100% chance they all sign with their previous teams. If I had to pick one of them that might not see the end of the season with their respective team, it is Derrick Rose. The Trailblazers have the most cap room going into this offseason, but if no other quality players sign with the supermax Rose, Portland may want to cash in and move on, but that also doesn't seem incredibly likely.

GM IamQuailMan; Milwaukee Bucks: This is a tough question because all 3 of these players are more than likely deserving of a supermax. If I'm going to pick one though, I'm going to go with Deandre Jordan. He saw the Warriors bring in Rudy Gobert, the clear heir-apparent disguised as the teams PF in the twin towers line-up. The only way to guarantee a Jordan return is a supermax (which may not even be a guarantee... as we saw in RFA). But do the Warriors want to supermax a 28 year old Reb/Def Center? Let's assume they do. Deandre on a super max ($25mil, $28mil next), Gobert soon to be maxed ($6mil this year, $21mil next), Rudy Gay on a super max ($30.5mil, $33.5mil next), and newly added Patrick Beverly on a 12.5mil/yr deal in perpetuity it seems... Financially, this team will be cap hell soon enough. Those 4 players alone this year eat up $73mil of the $86mil cap. Next year... 95mil between 4 players. Lots of assumptions here obviously, but Deandre might want to jump ship now. Warriors may be better off for it too, honestly.

GM NOLa.; Sacramento Kings: Point for InnerGI. I feel 100% confident that DeAndre Jordan will receive a supermax from the Warriors, and just about everyone else picked DeAndre Jordan.

Article was so long it was giving me errors trying to post up.

Nice job everyone involved. That was a nice read.

5 points to 2016-17 media cap for Tani, JNR, Louie, BallSoHard, Quail, and Inner

Omg I just saw that I put

"it's always hard to predict that big free agent that will leave, and I personally think all 3 of these guys wilL"

And forgot to put the word stay after will. (facepalm) welcome to article writing on the phone ladies and gentlemen

Edited for you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk