Nope, the two closest players I had to actually being homegrown talents on that team were Horace Grant (who I drafted in the creation draft but traded away after the first season for Nick Anderson, who I then traded years later to bring Horace back and pick up Joe Smith), and Robert Horry (who was drafted by Quail with a pick I'd foolishly traded to Cleveland earlier, and I acquired mainly by using picks I'd gained from trading the pick that became Bryon Russell to the Mavs). I could write a book on how not to tank, that's just how horrible I was at keeping the assets I'd gained from stinking. Ron Mercer was actually the 1st-ever non-creation draft Wizards draftee, and that was in 1997! Point is, that team's a horrible example of building your way to the Finals through tanking, as not a single draftee from 1991-96 started out as a Wizard. Tanking (and it wasn't really tanking, as I was trying to win...I just stunk at doing so), didn't help me one bit back then.TheSyndicate wrote:But your draftees allowed you to make those moves.
Nicest GM, my ass.Xist2Inspire wrote:Nope, the two closest players I had to actually being homegrown talents on that team were Horace Grant (who I drafted in the creation draft but traded away after the first season for Nick Anderson, who I then traded years later to bring Horace back and pick up Joe Smith), and Robert Horry (who was drafted by Quail with a pick I'd foolishly traded to Cleveland earlier, and I acquired mainly by using picks I'd gained from trading the pick that became Bryon Russell to the Mavs). I could write a book on how not to tank, that's just how horrible I was at keeping the assets I'd gained from stinking. Ron Mercer was actually the 1st-ever non-creation draft Wizards draftee, and that was in 1997! Point is, that team's a horrible example of building your way to the Finals through tanking, as not a single draftee from 1991-96 started out as a Wizard. Tanking (and it wasn't really tanking, as I was trying to win...I just stunk at doing so), didn't help me one bit back then.TheSyndicate wrote:But your draftees allowed you to make those moves.
(Nice article btw )
No argument at all - none of this should discount the importance of putting pieces together that fit together nor coaching skills. It's hard to do without them.DarthVegito wrote:Thanks for doing this Ryan. It is a good article. I must offer some perspective though.
OP players are the top five players in the league, according to Ryan's definition. Meaning if there are 5 OP players every year, then some teams with OP players do not make the finals. I would just point out that the same hand full of teams have been in the Finals the past ten years. That's not a coincidence. So yeah, maybe you need an OP player but you also need other things like coaching skills. Of which I would argue is the most important aspect of SIM league playoff basketball.
I love the fact that you made a hard line of the definition of OP. I do. It's discussed and argued so damn much, that something like this is good. An OP is a top player in the league, simply put. And that's what you did here.TheSyndicate wrote:No argument at all - none of this should discount the importance of putting pieces together that fit together nor coaching skills. It's hard to do without them.DarthVegito wrote:Thanks for doing this Ryan. It is a good article. I must offer some perspective though.
OP players are the top five players in the league, according to Ryan's definition. Meaning if there are 5 OP players every year, then some teams with OP players do not make the finals. I would just point out that the same hand full of teams have been in the Finals the past ten years. That's not a coincidence. So yeah, maybe you need an OP player but you also need other things like coaching skills. Of which I would argue is the most important aspect of SIM league playoff basketball.