#SLOE: People's Basketball Sim League

I had a thought, what if in a couple seasons (to be fair to those teams that built up for a run) we started over with a 1990 creation draft. And before y'all jump on me, the downsides to this are obvious:
1. We've done this for so long, why would we stop?
2. People have built long-term strategies, it wouldn't be fair to them to not, say, see Duren grow up.
3. It's a TON of work to do a creation draft, and would probably take weeks to accomplish.

But the reasons I'm suggesting this are basically (in no particular order):
1. We have an excellent group of GMs, but 11 (I think) didn't get a chance to do the original draft, now as we're dealing with some weird rookie classes (whether you're into it, or not, I don't think there's debate that the players are weird), maybe it's the right time to go back to the beginning?

2. I, personally liked the game better with real guys, comparing SLOE stats to real stats, etc.

3. Wouldn't it be fun to see if the league is totally different? T-Mac/Penny/Kemp just pretty good? MJ with a ring? Kobe great? Payton in the HOF? I'd be curious to see what random decent player ends up a god, and vice versa.

3a. We know how to do this better. Imagine if we started from the beginning with no 100+ ratings, TC insurance, lux tax, RFA, everything, woowee

4. A few GMs are pretty worn out, and may like the idea of a shake-up.

5. Can you imagine starting from scratch with a bunch of GMs that know what they're doing?* The creation draft would be insane, trades could be amazing, tanking for guys that were good the last time we did this, but ended up being just average, would be HILARIOUS.

6. At the end of the day, this game is pretty fun, and I think starting from scratch would be a new opportunity and REALLY REALLY fun.

Anyway, just a thought, I was curious how many GMs would like it/hate it. I can already see the 'Hard Pass' from a handful of the leagues vets, but there may be a bunch that would be into it - especially in the group of 11 GMs that have never gotten to do a creation draft.



*Plus NickMalone**.
**lol/jk

Hard pass for me. I think it would be repetitive and kind of boring going thru the same drafts and signing the same guys all over again

Maybe down the road, but I'd like to see where this game goes with the fake players. I think the weird ratings help the game evolve and keep us on our toes with how to strategize, and I also think that renaming the players is a useful way to keep relevant. We've got Ben Simmons, Lonzo Ball, and Buddy Hield in the league, so we don't have to lose that aspect.

TheSyndicate wrote: Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:54 pm *Plus NickMalone**.
**lol/jk

Pass.

I’m super torn on this. And it’s probably a lot easier for me since I’m going to completely rebuild anyway. I give this league a ton of credit for me being the man fan that I am. I love the NBA and this forum/group of people/sim league has really increased my interest in pro basketball.

Ive been thinking about this for a while a creation draft would definitely re-energize the league. But regardless of what we do. These generated players just aren’t cutting it for me. I’d put it at 3 options:

Option 1: change nothing and keep doing what we are doing (my least favorite option)

Option 2: start doing the drafts in say 1980 after this Wilmer Pak draft (are we calling it the Wilmer Pak draft) don’t start it with a slam dunk HoF draft but an old one. Part of my enjoyment was learning about older players I’m never got to see play. (This is probably the most fair to gms who have been planning)

Option 3: complete new creation draft. This is unfair to teams that have planned for a while. But would probably generate a ton of new interest and be fun.

Personally I’m good with either option 2 or 3 would probably prefer option 2. But option 1 is getting old to me with every draft class in a hurry.

*the typos in this post are funny. Not even gonna fix em*

Conroy wrote: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:58 pm I’m super torn on this. And it’s probably a lot easier for me since I’m going to completely rebuild anyway. I give this league a ton of credit for me being the man fan that I am. I love the NBA and this forum/group of people/sim league has really increased my interest in pro basketball.

Ive been thinking about this for a while a creation draft would definitely re-energize the league. But regardless of what we do. These generated players just aren’t cutting it for me. I’d put it at 3 options:

Option 1: change nothing and keep doing what we are doing (my least favorite option)

Option 2: start doing the drafts in say 1980 after this Wilmer Pak draft (are we calling it the Wilmer Pak draft) don’t start it with a slam dunk HoF draft but an old one. Part of my enjoyment was learning about older players I’m never got to see play. (This is probably the most fair to gms who have been planning)

Option 3: complete new creation draft. This is unfair to teams that have planned for a while. But would probably generate a ton of new interest and be fun.

Personally I’m good with either option 2 or 3 would probably prefer option 2. But option 1 is getting old to me with every draft class in a hurry.

*the typos in this post are funny. Not even gonna fix em*

Yeah, I agree man. I like your option 2 as well.

I'm ok with going forward with what we've got.

Wombataholic wrote: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:55 am I'm ok with going forward with what we've got.

I put myself in your shoes and yeah with AD, no way we redo the creation draft. That's why I think option 2 of maybe restarting the draft classes so that we use actual players. I've just never been a fan of fake players, we try to make this league as realistic as possible with rules, training, etc... so looking at rosters and seeing names like Damion McNary, Harland Ellinger, Jeffery Duren I don't even know what I'm seeing. If it were Karl-Anthony Towns, Jamaal Murray, and Markelle Fultz it just is so much better.

The only way I can see doing a brand new creation draft, is to somehow incorporate a keeper option. So that someone like wombat could forgoe a certain pick and "keep" AD

Conroy wrote: Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:28 am

Wombataholic wrote: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:55 am I'm ok with going forward with what we've got.

I put myself in your shoes and yeah with AD, no way we redo the creation draft. That's why I think option 2 of maybe restarting the draft classes so that we use actual players. I've just never been a fan of fake players, we try to make this league as realistic as possible with rules, training, etc... so looking at rosters and seeing names like Damion McNary, Harland Ellinger, Jeffery Duren I don't even know what I'm seeing. If it were Karl-Anthony Towns, Jamaal Murray, and Markelle Fultz it just is so much better.

The only way I can see doing a brand new creation draft, is to somehow incorporate a keeper option. So that someone like wombat could forgoe a certain pick and "keep" AD

Oh man. AD vs Kareem Abdul Jabbar? Sign me up.

Conroy wrote: Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:28 am

Wombataholic wrote: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:55 am I'm ok with going forward with what we've got.

I put myself in your shoes and yeah with AD, no way we redo the creation draft. That's why I think option 2 of maybe restarting the draft classes so that we use actual players. I've just never been a fan of fake players, we try to make this league as realistic as possible with rules, training, etc... so looking at rosters and seeing names like Damion McNary, Harland Ellinger, Jeffery Duren I don't even know what I'm seeing. If it were Karl-Anthony Towns, Jamaal Murray, and Markelle Fultz it just is so much better.

The only way I can see doing a brand new creation draft, is to somehow incorporate a keeper option. So that someone like wombat could forgoe a certain pick and "keep" AD

For me, it's more about knowing what happens with an upcoming draft class. I like that we don't know what the draft class might become, sort of like in real life. Knowing what happens with a draft class takes some of the fun out of it for me.

If we end up doing a creation draft, I'm ok without having a keeper option.

How far back historically can we go? Can we mix years (a draft class with LeBron, Pistol Pete, and Bill Russell)? Also, I'm of the mindset of seeing where things go with the college classes. Perhaps we can revisit when half of the league consists of "fake" players.

I could be wrong, it is entirely possible but...it seems to me that the league is at an all time high in interest and activity. The articles and the engagement with every round in off-season. Sure we have those who aren't as dedicated but we always have. And we have those few outliers who despise these new created players, but besides those Debbie-Downers I really don't see why there is discussion on this anyway.

Also I'll point out something that no one has, of we go back to any particular era the rules will change as will the style of play. The game automatically adjusts the sliders as the years move on. For instance when the 3 pointer became a thing and prevalent IRL you could immediately see more 3s being shot by sim teams. This game is a finicky one. And if we try and do anything drastic we could bring down nearly 30 seasons of sim league. Is that what we want?

Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk

I'm not too thrilled with the generated players, but I'd be even less inclined to play this game if we restarted.

I am absolutely against a "scrap everything and creation draft". I would be maybe open to starting with a 1970s draft class at some point. The new players have been somewhat frustrating (mostly the size and stamina issues, skills are coming in), but I don't mind playing it out.

The size issue I think is stemming from using the College game where players are short already there. Skills change, but height doesn't when importing the classes. When we look at the FBB Pro game draft class generated during TC (that we scrap for the college file), last season we noticed that size and stamina issues weren't as much a problem. We also had a purple potential player generated, which I don't feel like college will ever create (altho it has yet to be seen).

I think I would rather (after giving the college game a chance for a few more seasons) give the game generated players a chance. Or maybe we can monitor those as we continue through the seasons and compare. Wish we had captured the outputs of the pro FBB draft class files, but oh well. I do remember the 1st one was a crappy class (and the college game file saved the draft)... but then the most recent was mind-blowingly good (and the college game was the lesser of the two... although still deep).

So i would like to maybe observe the draft class of the upcoming season and at least see how these players come in, size AND stamina wise.

I'd be up for a creation draft of PSSL

I totally get where you're coming from with this. The game probably isn't as fun for you and a lot of things hasn't exactly gone perfect in Denver, but I just cant get behind a redraft. I think one of the greatest things about our league is the rich history. Just erasing that for a change of pace would be wrong imho.

In terms of drafting guys that were in the league before our creation draft; I can't say I love that either but it's the lesser of the evil's. I do like the current course personally. I know we have some 6'3" guards and some 6'8" centers that take time to develop (trust me I hate the development time as much as anyone) I think it puts an emphasis on size and athleticism when you pick. As long as there's nothing being hidden at the time of drafting, i think it's fair enough. I would like to see the stamina and foul ratings augmented some though.

ballsohard wrote: Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:32 pm I totally get where you're coming from with this. The game probably isn't as fun for you and a lot of things hasn't exactly gone perfect in Denver, but I just cant get behind a redraft. I think one of the greatest things about our league is the rich history. Just erasing that for a change of pace would be wrong imho.

In terms of drafting guys that were in the league before our creation draft; I can't say I love that either but it's the lesser of the evil's. I do like the current course personally. I know we have some 6'3" guards and some 6'8" centers that take time to develop (trust me I hate the development time as much as anyone) I think it puts an emphasis on size and athleticism when you pick. As long as there's nothing being hidden at the time of drafting, i think it's fair enough. I would like to see the stamina and foul ratings augmented some though.

What if we start over sometime in the 60s or 70s with real, old players, but not make the move until a year like 2030? That way people don't think their current planning is wasted.

ballsohard wrote: Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:32 pm I totally get where you're coming from with this. The game probably isn't as fun for you and a lot of things hasn't exactly gone perfect in Denver, but I just cant get behind a redraft. I think one of the greatest things about our league is the rich history. Just erasing that for a change of pace would be wrong imho.

In terms of drafting guys that were in the league before our creation draft; I can't say I love that either but it's the lesser of the evil's. I do like the current course personally. I know we have some 6'3" guards and some 6'8" centers that take time to develop (trust me I hate the development time as much as anyone) I think it puts an emphasis on size and athleticism when you pick. As long as there's nothing being hidden at the time of drafting, i think it's fair enough. I would like to see the stamina and foul ratings augmented some though.

I think it’s almost unanimous that nobody wants to do a creation draft. But just out of curiousity why change some ratings but not others?

Conroy wrote: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:09 pm

ballsohard wrote: Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:32 pm I totally get where you're coming from with this. The game probably isn't as fun for you and a lot of things hasn't exactly gone perfect in Denver, but I just cant get behind a redraft. I think one of the greatest things about our league is the rich history. Just erasing that for a change of pace would be wrong imho.

In terms of drafting guys that were in the league before our creation draft; I can't say I love that either but it's the lesser of the evil's. I do like the current course personally. I know we have some 6'3" guards and some 6'8" centers that take time to develop (trust me I hate the development time as much as anyone) I think it puts an emphasis on size and athleticism when you pick. As long as there's nothing being hidden at the time of drafting, i think it's fair enough. I would like to see the stamina and foul ratings augmented some though.

I think it’s almost unanimous that nobody wants to do a creation draft. But just out of curiousity why change some ratings but not others?

Because stamina and foul ratings actively prevent a player from playing in a game. A stamina of 20 or a foul rating of 0 means that draft pick can't stay on the court, and there is no path for that player to ever be viable on the court (too hard to moves those ratings to a useable spot).

Inner_GI wrote: Tue Oct 17, 2017 10:51 am

Conroy wrote: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:09 pm

ballsohard wrote: Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:32 pm I totally get where you're coming from with this. The game probably isn't as fun for you and a lot of things hasn't exactly gone perfect in Denver, but I just cant get behind a redraft. I think one of the greatest things about our league is the rich history. Just erasing that for a change of pace would be wrong imho.

In terms of drafting guys that were in the league before our creation draft; I can't say I love that either but it's the lesser of the evil's. I do like the current course personally. I know we have some 6'3" guards and some 6'8" centers that take time to develop (trust me I hate the development time as much as anyone) I think it puts an emphasis on size and athleticism when you pick. As long as there's nothing being hidden at the time of drafting, i think it's fair enough. I would like to see the stamina and foul ratings augmented some though.

I think it’s almost unanimous that nobody wants to do a creation draft. But just out of curiousity why change some ratings but not others?

Because stamina and foul ratings actively prevent a player from playing in a game. A stamina of 20 or a foul rating of 0 means that draft pick can't stay on the court, and there is no path for that player to ever be viable on the court (too hard to moves those ratings to a useable spot).

Not to mention, those ratings don't really grow in TC.

Conroy wrote: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:09 pm

ballsohard wrote: Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:32 pm I totally get where you're coming from with this. The game probably isn't as fun for you and a lot of things hasn't exactly gone perfect in Denver, but I just cant get behind a redraft. I think one of the greatest things about our league is the rich history. Just erasing that for a change of pace would be wrong imho.

In terms of drafting guys that were in the league before our creation draft; I can't say I love that either but it's the lesser of the evil's. I do like the current course personally. I know we have some 6'3" guards and some 6'8" centers that take time to develop (trust me I hate the development time as much as anyone) I think it puts an emphasis on size and athleticism when you pick. As long as there's nothing being hidden at the time of drafting, i think it's fair enough. I would like to see the stamina and foul ratings augmented some though.

I think it’s almost unanimous that nobody wants to do a creation draft. But just out of curiousity why change some ratings but not others?

I think the guys above me took the core points. But to add on to it, both these ratings grow like athleticism ratings... which is like +3or so unlike the actual ratings that can go as high as +10. While i'm ok with everyone not having like 80 STA to start the season, we've for a lot of guys under 60, and common sense would tell you athletes this good should be able to play 20 mpg in a basketball game.

In the NBA Last year, Demarcus cousins averaged 3.8 FPG ... or 278 fouls in 2465 minutes which is .112 FPM. Where out worst foul at a 0 rating per wig's stats is .141 and with every foul rating point it drops by .001. So if we said irl NBA DMC is the worst fouler ever and deserves a 0, the game still fouls at a rate WAY above what's real live. I actually probably should have brought this up in the vote thread, but I was on to something when I said there should be a starting point. With wig's calculations and the kast year average being at .112 I think there should probably be a baseline of a 29 rating.

ballsohard wrote: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:18 pmIn the NBA Last year, Demarcus cousins averaged 3.8 FPG ... or 278 fouls in 2465 minutes which is .112 FPM. Where out worst foul at a 0 rating per wig's stats is .141 and with every foul rating point it drops by .001. So if we said irl NBA DMC is the worst fouler ever and deserves a 0, the game still fouls at a rate WAY above what's real live. I actually probably should have brought this up in the vote thread, but I was on to something when I said there should be a starting point. With wig's calculations and the kast year average being at .112 I think there should probably be a baseline of a 29 rating.

Problem: You are starting with the flawed assumption that last year’s version of Cousins is the worst fouler in NBA history in terms of fouls per minute. He wasn’t even close to the worst fouler LAST SEASON by fouls per minute. https://www.sportingcharts.com/nba/stat ... ders/2016/

Now if we put a minutes played floor of 82 games times 20 minutes per game to cut out small sample sizes skewing the results (so minimum 1640 minutes), the worst fouler was Marquess Chriss - 263 fouls in 1743 minutes or 0.151 fouls per minute. So by that measure FBB is undershooting fouls by roughly 7%. Should we reduce all foul ratings by 7% to make sure more fouls get called? I don’t believe so. I think we are “close enough.”

WigNosy wrote:

ballsohard wrote: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:18 pmIn the NBA Last year, Demarcus cousins averaged 3.8 FPG ... or 278 fouls in 2465 minutes which is .112 FPM. Where out worst foul at a 0 rating per wig's stats is .141 and with every foul rating point it drops by .001. So if we said irl NBA DMC is the worst fouler ever and deserves a 0, the game still fouls at a rate WAY above what's real live. I actually probably should have brought this up in the vote thread, but I was on to something when I said there should be a starting point. With wig's calculations and the kast year average being at .112 I think there should probably be a baseline of a 29 rating.

Problem: You are starting with the flawed assumption that last year’s version of Cousins is the worst fouler in NBA history in terms of fouls per minute. He wasn’t even close to the worst fouler LAST SEASON by fouls per minute. https://www.sportingcharts.com/nba/stat ... ders/2016/

Now if we put a minutes played floor of 82 games times 20 minutes per game to cut out small sample sizes skewing the results (so minimum 1640 minutes), the worst fouler was Marquess Chriss - 263 fouls in 1743 minutes or 0.151 fouls per minute. So by that measure FBB is undershooting fouls by roughly 7%. Should we reduce all foul ratings by 7% to make sure more fouls get called? I don’t believe so. I think we are “close enough.”

That’s fair , I thought I sorted that but apparently there was some filter