#SLOE: People's Basketball Sim League

Just thoughts for comment. They are not self-consistent, nor are the "one giant proposal."

1) Reduce the incentive to be bad, increase the incentive to be good, reduce the penalty of "failing" to try. Amnesty was an idea on this front.

2) For each team with the worst sim, a competition committee (3 people) review the worst sims. If there is good reason, either accept, offer advice, or require corrective action. If the Rockets stink this sim, it's injuries (2!), move along. If you played the Hawks twice and the Sonics twice, move along. If there are things that can be done, the committee or an appointee (Balls is unaffiliated with a team and consults for example), can offer roster advice if the DC seems well-intentioned but misguided. Alternatively, the DC can be highlighted for public comment. If it's a case where corrective action is needed (committee decides), then it's laid out publicly . . . evidence and decision.

3) Bottom 3 sims each "round" automatically go recommended next sim unless recommended produced the low sim or competition committee produces . Maybe not bottom 3. Maybe anyone with below 25% winning record after the 3rd sim (on pace for 20 wins or less 20 games in or something as an idea, but put it in terms of sims for our chunky way we handle time).

4) If a team's record is below 25% by the halfway point in the season, teams go into stewardship, and the competition committee must approve DC's, trades, signings.

5) Each team in the bottom 3 must write out a justification for their DC.

I'll stop there and let people think, talk about these.

Your posts are too smart for me

You're welcome.

In case you were serious, however, all I'm saying is if you want to bitch about tanking, tell me the bad things coming from it rather than argue about what it is.

Regardless, there are worse things than tanking,

Y'know, it might be a good idea to move this to the Suggestion Box. Just sayin'.

42PhD wrote:

Your posts are too smart for me

You're welcome.

In case you were serious, however, all I'm saying is if you want to bitch about tanking, tell me the bad things coming from it rather than argue about what it is.

Regardless, there are worse things than tanking,

Wat? They actually are smart. Like you use good words and paragraphs lol.

coltsguy510 wrote:

42PhD wrote:

Your posts are too smart for me

You're welcome.

In case you were serious, however, all I'm saying is if you want to bitch about tanking, tell me the bad things coming from it rather than argue about what it is.

Regardless, there are worse things than tanking,

Wat? They actually are smart. Like you use good words and paragraphs lol.

CG...you are just...too much. you BBB

coltsguy510 wrote:

42PhD wrote:

Your posts are too smart for me

You're welcome.

In case you were serious, however, all I'm saying is if you want to bitch about tanking, tell me the bad things coming from it rather than argue about what it is.

Regardless, there are worse things than tanking,

Wat? They actually are smart. Like you use good words and paragraphs lol.

Wasn't being sassy, just summed up in case the post was opaque or tl;dr lulz. Sorry if it came across that way.

coltsguy510 wrote:

42PhD wrote:

Your posts are too smart for me

You're welcome.

In case you were serious, however, all I'm saying is if you want to bitch about tanking, tell me the bad things coming from it rather than argue about what it is.

Regardless, there are worse things than tanking,

Wat? They actually are smart. Like you use good words and paragraphs lol.

CG...you are just...too much. you BBB[/quote]
Since he first entered the league I have believed this

NOLa. wrote:I think you are tanking.

PLEASE DONT BE MAD AND GIVE ME THE COLD SHOULDER AGAIN

Sent via Morse code

Care to elaborate?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Soundwave wrote:

NOLa. wrote:I think you are tanking.

PLEASE DONT BE MAD AND GIVE ME THE COLD SHOULDER AGAIN

Sent via Morse code

Care to elaborate?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I sent doug a PM on skype.

Sent via Morse code

So two issues lately are realignment and tanking. What if we combined the two? Just throwing out ideas but what if the two worst records regardless of what happens in lotto are up for relegation and the two 8 seeds get to pick which division they are sent to.

Or the two teams who make the playoffs with worst records can swap divisions with any lotto team. Or they can pick which teams get moved around but playoff teams are safe I dunno just throwing it out there.

Unless there is a rule that defines Tanking this whole thread is silly to me and if their is a rule why do we have to argue over it here, instead of enforcing it?

I am not to sure about the color code thing though, I have seen orange veterans who can start ahead of some yellow or green rookies. Though what the commish says is true, yet in some instances it may be wrong... but like he said he will PM you, for discussions, but if neither party can see eye to eye, how will we find resolve? does the commish just drop sanctions because of his belief?

Keep in mind 2 GM may not have the same way of thinking. Let's look at real life for instants, Golden State Warriors - I strongly believe Andre Iguadola is better than Harisson Barnes, but do we call Barnes starting tanking? No. The Head coach want one of his stars to run with his second unit.

Though I know this is not real life, We all know what Tanking is, and we know it when we see it.

So for clarity, If a GM bench all is greens for his yellow guys and go on a 10 game winning streak, is that tanking? We should all come down on him because according to the rules you cant use all yellows with all those greens on the bench... So he re-enter his greens and go on a 10 game losing streak and that is not?

Tanking should be base on the stats players are putting up and not a color system what no one themselves full understand. If my start green center is play 36 minutes with 9.6 pts 5.2 reb 0.2 blks and starting ahead of yellow center doing 20 minutes 7.8 pts 6.0 reb and 1 blk; then that sounds more like one is tanking as the better player is one on the bench, no?

I like the pornography reference.

I also like your examples, but I am not sure they exist.

The theoretical talk about tanking goes only so far. Until there are specific examples, to try to test definitions against, it will result in ideological bluster.

I still want to know the harm people see.

I know some may criticize me for hiding behind a sources account, but I want to single some people out and let them defend themselves, and I would prefer they not have a vendetta against me. First of all, I believe someone mentioned that tanking isn't hurting anyone so just let it run it's course (more or less). If that's the case, why not let those trying to lose sign these r/r guys out of the draft? Why make them try and cover up their trying to lose with signing Y/Y?

The reason tanking is a problem in my opinion is that this is a highly competitive league. I haven't spent nearly as much time rebuilding as some teams, so maybe I'm putting my foot somewhere it shouldn't be, but I wanted to comment.

If anyone listened to the Lowe Post with Amin Elhassan, you hear him talking about how even the most patient ownership groups run out of patience at some point. There's nothing wrong with bottoming out for a year or 2, but when it's taking 3-4 plus years of being miserably bad, something's wrong, and in real life, that GM is fired. This was a big debate in the beginning of the league with computer-run teams. There's no fun in letting the computer run a shitty team and having them hoard top 5-10 picks every single year. It's just less fun for the rest of the league.

With that said, objectively, it's really just not that hard to look at a team and see if they're trying to lose games (outside of simple roster build). If a team sucks at shooting 3s and is taking the 10th most 3s per game, something's wrong there. If a team has a good facilitating point guard and is running a motion of 1, that's a problem.

For player examples, here are a few:

2001: Orlando Magic
Tyson Chandler plays 30.5 minutes a game with a PER of 7.8. Why? Because he wants to lose and we reward rookies for playing 30 MPG. Chandler posts the worst EWA in the entire league with a -3.5. By being on the court throughout the season, Chandler took 3.5 wins away compared to a guy you can sign off the street. Meanwhile Jahidi White plays 20.4 MPG starting 0 games. White is by no means a star, but he's a legitimate player. I believe he plays for the Warriors this year and is putting up legitimate minutes.

This year: Denver Nuggets
Smush Parker is playing 23.6 minutes per game with a PER of 6.4. He's started 15 of the 39 games he's played in. In half a season, he's posted an EWA of -2.1. Look at his ratings and you can sign almost ANY player in free agency and get better production. That's just egregious.

This year: Minnesota Timberwolves
Luis Scola is playing 17.5 minutes per game with a PER of 9.0. He has an EWA of -1.8 halfway through the season. There is no reason for Scola to step foot on a basketball court this season unless trying to lose with the excuse of "playing young players."

This year: Charlotte Hornets
Kurt Thomas is simply a better player with better ratings than Zach Randolph. Thomas has played in 33 of the 37 games with an average of 6 minutes a game (garbage time). That's the player Randolph should be right now. Instead, he's playing 16 minutes per game with a net efficiency rating of -23.

There are many more I can point out, and to those I did point out, I'm not mad or pissed and I don't want to offend, but I would love to hear your explanation for your moves.

Sources wrote:I know some may criticize me for hiding behind a sources account, but I want to single some people out and let them defend themselves, and I would prefer they not have a vendetta against me. First of all, I believe someone mentioned that tanking isn't hurting anyone so just let it run it's course (more or less). If that's the case, why not let those trying to lose sign these r/r guys out of the draft? Why make them try and cover up their trying to lose with signing Y/Y?

The reason tanking is a problem in my opinion is that this is a highly competitive league. I haven't spent nearly as much time rebuilding as some teams, so maybe I'm putting my foot somewhere it shouldn't be, but I wanted to comment.

If anyone listened to the Lowe Post with Amin Elhassan, you hear him talking about how even the most patient ownership groups run out of patience at some point. There's nothing wrong with bottoming out for a year or 2, but when it's taking 3-4 plus years of being miserably bad, something's wrong, and in real life, that GM is fired. This was a big debate in the beginning of the league with computer-run teams. There's no fun in letting the computer run a shitty team and having them hoard top 5-10 picks every single year. It's just less fun for the rest of the league.

With that said, objectively, it's really just not that hard to look at a team and see if they're trying to lose games (outside of simple roster build). If a team sucks at shooting 3s and is taking the 10th most 3s per game, something's wrong there. If a team has a good facilitating point guard and is running a motion of 1, that's a problem.

For player examples, here are a few:

2001: Orlando Magic
Tyson Chandler plays 30.5 minutes a game with a PER of 7.8. Why? Because he wants to lose and we reward rookies for playing 30 MPG. Chandler posts the worst EWA in the entire league with a -3.5. By being on the court throughout the season, Chandler took 3.5 wins away compared to a guy you can sign off the street. Meanwhile Jahidi White plays 20.4 MPG starting 0 games. White is by no means a star, but he's a legitimate player. I believe he plays for the Warriors this year and is putting up legitimate minutes.

This year: Denver Nuggets
Smush Parker is playing 23.6 minutes per game with a PER of 6.4. He's started 15 of the 39 games he's played in. In half a season, he's posted an EWA of -2.1. Look at his ratings and you can sign almost ANY player in free agency and get better production. That's just egregious.

This year: Minnesota Timberwolves
Luis Scola is playing 17.5 minutes per game with a PER of 9.0. He has an EWA of -1.8 halfway through the season. There is no reason for Scola to step foot on a basketball court this season unless trying to lose with the excuse of "playing young players."

This year: Charlotte Hornets
Kurt Thomas is simply a better player with better ratings than Zach Randolph. Thomas has played in 33 of the 37 games with an average of 6 minutes a game (garbage time). That's the player Randolph should be right now. Instead, he's playing 16 minutes per game with a net efficiency rating of -23.

There are many more I can point out, and to those I did point out, I'm not mad or pissed and I don't want to offend, but I would love to hear your explanation for your moves.

I will criticize you for hiding. But maybe you do it because you see how when I do it I am seen as having some kind of personal vendetta. Not to mention when I point it out, the room is silent on backing me up. I'm sorry, I apologize. I know exactly why you would hide behind "sources". I should have thought of this. Carry on.

Sources wrote:I know some may criticize me for hiding behind a sources account, but I want to single some people out and let them defend themselves, and I would prefer they not have a vendetta against me. First of all, I believe someone mentioned that tanking isn't hurting anyone so just let it run it's course (more or less). If that's the case, why not let those trying to lose sign these r/r guys out of the draft? Why make them try and cover up their trying to lose with signing Y/Y?

The reason tanking is a problem in my opinion is that this is a highly competitive league. I haven't spent nearly as much time rebuilding as some teams, so maybe I'm putting my foot somewhere it shouldn't be, but I wanted to comment.

If anyone listened to the Lowe Post with Amin Elhassan, you hear him talking about how even the most patient ownership groups run out of patience at some point. There's nothing wrong with bottoming out for a year or 2, but when it's taking 3-4 plus years of being miserably bad, something's wrong, and in real life, that GM is fired. This was a big debate in the beginning of the league with computer-run teams. There's no fun in letting the computer run a shitty team and having them hoard top 5-10 picks every single year. It's just less fun for the rest of the league.

With that said, objectively, it's really just not that hard to look at a team and see if they're trying to lose games (outside of simple roster build). If a team sucks at shooting 3s and is taking the 10th most 3s per game, something's wrong there. If a team has a good facilitating point guard and is running a motion of 1, that's a problem.

For player examples, here are a few:

2001: Orlando Magic
Tyson Chandler plays 30.5 minutes a game with a PER of 7.8. Why? Because he wants to lose and we reward rookies for playing 30 MPG. Chandler posts the worst EWA in the entire league with a -3.5. By being on the court throughout the season, Chandler took 3.5 wins away compared to a guy you can sign off the street. Meanwhile Jahidi White plays 20.4 MPG starting 0 games. White is by no means a star, but he's a legitimate player. I believe he plays for the Warriors this year and is putting up legitimate minutes.

This year: Denver Nuggets
Smush Parker is playing 23.6 minutes per game with a PER of 6.4. He's started 15 of the 39 games he's played in. In half a season, he's posted an EWA of -2.1. Look at his ratings and you can sign almost ANY player in free agency and get better production. That's just egregious.

This year: Minnesota Timberwolves
Luis Scola is playing 17.5 minutes per game with a PER of 9.0. He has an EWA of -1.8 halfway through the season. There is no reason for Scola to step foot on a basketball court this season unless trying to lose with the excuse of "playing young players."

This year: Charlotte Hornets
Kurt Thomas is simply a better player with better ratings than Zach Randolph. Thomas has played in 33 of the 37 games with an average of 6 minutes a game (garbage time). That's the player Randolph should be right now. Instead, he's playing 16 minutes per game with a net efficiency rating of -23.

There are many more I can point out, and to those I did point out, I'm not mad or pissed and I don't want to offend, but I would love to hear your explanation for your moves.

I agree, if that wasn't obvious btw.

DarthVegito wrote:

Sources wrote:I know some may criticize me for hiding behind a sources account, but I want to single some people out and let them defend themselves, and I would prefer they not have a vendetta against me. First of all, I believe someone mentioned that tanking isn't hurting anyone so just let it run it's course (more or less). If that's the case, why not let those trying to lose sign these r/r guys out of the draft? Why make them try and cover up their trying to lose with signing Y/Y?

The reason tanking is a problem in my opinion is that this is a highly competitive league. I haven't spent nearly as much time rebuilding as some teams, so maybe I'm putting my foot somewhere it shouldn't be, but I wanted to comment.

If anyone listened to the Lowe Post with Amin Elhassan, you hear him talking about how even the most patient ownership groups run out of patience at some point. There's nothing wrong with bottoming out for a year or 2, but when it's taking 3-4 plus years of being miserably bad, something's wrong, and in real life, that GM is fired. This was a big debate in the beginning of the league with computer-run teams. There's no fun in letting the computer run a shitty team and having them hoard top 5-10 picks every single year. It's just less fun for the rest of the league.

With that said, objectively, it's really just not that hard to look at a team and see if they're trying to lose games (outside of simple roster build). If a team sucks at shooting 3s and is taking the 10th most 3s per game, something's wrong there. If a team has a good facilitating point guard and is running a motion of 1, that's a problem.

For player examples, here are a few:

2001: Orlando Magic
Tyson Chandler plays 30.5 minutes a game with a PER of 7.8. Why? Because he wants to lose and we reward rookies for playing 30 MPG. Chandler posts the worst EWA in the entire league with a -3.5. By being on the court throughout the season, Chandler took 3.5 wins away compared to a guy you can sign off the street. Meanwhile Jahidi White plays 20.4 MPG starting 0 games. White is by no means a star, but he's a legitimate player. I believe he plays for the Warriors this year and is putting up legitimate minutes.

This year: Denver Nuggets
Smush Parker is playing 23.6 minutes per game with a PER of 6.4. He's started 15 of the 39 games he's played in. In half a season, he's posted an EWA of -2.1. Look at his ratings and you can sign almost ANY player in free agency and get better production. That's just egregious.

This year: Minnesota Timberwolves
Luis Scola is playing 17.5 minutes per game with a PER of 9.0. He has an EWA of -1.8 halfway through the season. There is no reason for Scola to step foot on a basketball court this season unless trying to lose with the excuse of "playing young players."

This year: Charlotte Hornets
Kurt Thomas is simply a better player with better ratings than Zach Randolph. Thomas has played in 33 of the 37 games with an average of 6 minutes a game (garbage time). That's the player Randolph should be right now. Instead, he's playing 16 minutes per game with a net efficiency rating of -23.

There are many more I can point out, and to those I did point out, I'm not mad or pissed and I don't want to offend, but I would love to hear your explanation for your moves.

I agree, if that wasn't obvious btw.

Uhhh... Congrats I guess...

Sources wrote:

DarthVegito wrote:

Sources wrote:I know some may criticize me for hiding behind a sources account, but I want to single some people out and let them defend themselves, and I would prefer they not have a vendetta against me. First of all, I believe someone mentioned that tanking isn't hurting anyone so just let it run it's course (more or less). If that's the case, why not let those trying to lose sign these r/r guys out of the draft? Why make them try and cover up their trying to lose with signing Y/Y?

The reason tanking is a problem in my opinion is that this is a highly competitive league. I haven't spent nearly as much time rebuilding as some teams, so maybe I'm putting my foot somewhere it shouldn't be, but I wanted to comment.

If anyone listened to the Lowe Post with Amin Elhassan, you hear him talking about how even the most patient ownership groups run out of patience at some point. There's nothing wrong with bottoming out for a year or 2, but when it's taking 3-4 plus years of being miserably bad, something's wrong, and in real life, that GM is fired. This was a big debate in the beginning of the league with computer-run teams. There's no fun in letting the computer run a shitty team and having them hoard top 5-10 picks every single year. It's just less fun for the rest of the league.

With that said, objectively, it's really just not that hard to look at a team and see if they're trying to lose games (outside of simple roster build). If a team sucks at shooting 3s and is taking the 10th most 3s per game, something's wrong there. If a team has a good facilitating point guard and is running a motion of 1, that's a problem.

For player examples, here are a few:

2001: Orlando Magic
Tyson Chandler plays 30.5 minutes a game with a PER of 7.8. Why? Because he wants to lose and we reward rookies for playing 30 MPG. Chandler posts the worst EWA in the entire league with a -3.5. By being on the court throughout the season, Chandler took 3.5 wins away compared to a guy you can sign off the street. Meanwhile Jahidi White plays 20.4 MPG starting 0 games. White is by no means a star, but he's a legitimate player. I believe he plays for the Warriors this year and is putting up legitimate minutes.

This year: Denver Nuggets
Smush Parker is playing 23.6 minutes per game with a PER of 6.4. He's started 15 of the 39 games he's played in. In half a season, he's posted an EWA of -2.1. Look at his ratings and you can sign almost ANY player in free agency and get better production. That's just egregious.

This year: Minnesota Timberwolves
Luis Scola is playing 17.5 minutes per game with a PER of 9.0. He has an EWA of -1.8 halfway through the season. There is no reason for Scola to step foot on a basketball court this season unless trying to lose with the excuse of "playing young players."

This year: Charlotte Hornets
Kurt Thomas is simply a better player with better ratings than Zach Randolph. Thomas has played in 33 of the 37 games with an average of 6 minutes a game (garbage time). That's the player Randolph should be right now. Instead, he's playing 16 minutes per game with a net efficiency rating of -23.

There are many more I can point out, and to those I did point out, I'm not mad or pissed and I don't want to offend, but I would love to hear your explanation for your moves.

I agree, if that wasn't obvious btw.

Uhhh... Congrats I guess...

LOL, dickish reply when I was agreeing...that narrows down who the authors could be. Smh.

Sources wrote:

DarthVegito wrote:

Sources wrote:I know some may criticize me for hiding behind a sources account, but I want to single some people out and let them defend themselves, and I would prefer they not have a vendetta against me. First of all, I believe someone mentioned that tanking isn't hurting anyone so just let it run it's course (more or less). If that's the case, why not let those trying to lose sign these r/r guys out of the draft? Why make them try and cover up their trying to lose with signing Y/Y?

The reason tanking is a problem in my opinion is that this is a highly competitive league. I haven't spent nearly as much time rebuilding as some teams, so maybe I'm putting my foot somewhere it shouldn't be, but I wanted to comment.

If anyone listened to the Lowe Post with Amin Elhassan, you hear him talking about how even the most patient ownership groups run out of patience at some point. There's nothing wrong with bottoming out for a year or 2, but when it's taking 3-4 plus years of being miserably bad, something's wrong, and in real life, that GM is fired. This was a big debate in the beginning of the league with computer-run teams. There's no fun in letting the computer run a shitty team and having them hoard top 5-10 picks every single year. It's just less fun for the rest of the league.

With that said, objectively, it's really just not that hard to look at a team and see if they're trying to lose games (outside of simple roster build). If a team sucks at shooting 3s and is taking the 10th most 3s per game, something's wrong there. If a team has a good facilitating point guard and is running a motion of 1, that's a problem.

For player examples, here are a few:

2001: Orlando Magic
Tyson Chandler plays 30.5 minutes a game with a PER of 7.8. Why? Because he wants to lose and we reward rookies for playing 30 MPG. Chandler posts the worst EWA in the entire league with a -3.5. By being on the court throughout the season, Chandler took 3.5 wins away compared to a guy you can sign off the street. Meanwhile Jahidi White plays 20.4 MPG starting 0 games. White is by no means a star, but he's a legitimate player. I believe he plays for the Warriors this year and is putting up legitimate minutes.

This year: Denver Nuggets
Smush Parker is playing 23.6 minutes per game with a PER of 6.4. He's started 15 of the 39 games he's played in. In half a season, he's posted an EWA of -2.1. Look at his ratings and you can sign almost ANY player in free agency and get better production. That's just egregious.

This year: Minnesota Timberwolves
Luis Scola is playing 17.5 minutes per game with a PER of 9.0. He has an EWA of -1.8 halfway through the season. There is no reason for Scola to step foot on a basketball court this season unless trying to lose with the excuse of "playing young players."

This year: Charlotte Hornets
Kurt Thomas is simply a better player with better ratings than Zach Randolph. Thomas has played in 33 of the 37 games with an average of 6 minutes a game (garbage time). That's the player Randolph should be right now. Instead, he's playing 16 minutes per game with a net efficiency rating of -23.

There are many more I can point out, and to those I did point out, I'm not mad or pissed and I don't want to offend, but I would love to hear your explanation for your moves.

I agree, if that wasn't obvious btw.

Uhhh... Congrats I guess...

LOL, dickish reply when I was agreeing...that narrows down who the authors could be. Smh.[/quote]
Or maybe someone else signed into sources and responded?

Also my excuse for Chandler is that I don't really use or look at advanced stats

Other than that, yeah I probably should have played him less. My bad homeskillets

I have huge problems with the "Sources" post or people that think that way. What I take from it is you think top 5 or top 10 draft picks should not see game time? That to me is absurd.

Also smd sources

NickMalone77 wrote: