Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Blog Archive
-
▼
2012
(114)
-
▼
December
(22)
- Enter Match 18 scores
- Fourth Supplemental Draft with Rosters & Subsequen...
- Enter Match 18 lineups
- Enter Match 17 scores
- Enter Match 17 lineups
- Enter Match 16 scores
- Enter Match 16 lineup
- 4th Supplemental Draft with rosters and changes
- Enter Match 15 scores
- Enter Match 15 lineups
- Early & Late Calls all in January
- Enter Match 14 scores
- Enter Match 14 lineups
- Supplemental draft 3
- Enter Match 13 scores
- Enter Match 13 lineups
- Enter Match 12 scores
- Enter Match 12 lineups
- Enter Match 11 scores
- Enter Match 11 lineups
- Enter Match 10 scores
- Enter Match 10 lineups
-
▼
December
(22)
24 comments:
Partial scores in a high scoring match ETeam 234 B's 124 with 3 guys left to go.....Wingos 187 Nitecaps 182 needing only 6 points from Goran Dragic...Tickets are winners having scored 205 and still awaiting CP3 Invaders 144 w/LaMarcus yet to play...P4 177+Bosk Swat89 with King James ready to go-Jefferson DNPed for the Swat team
Ticket says
Almost a titlist in three sports. Bud friggin Grant. There's a guy here in the Embassy on Paradise Road who is concerned the St. Louis Rams are being held hostage for a stadium upgrade or else a return to Los Angeles is imminent. Are there any other franchises besides the Raiders in the four major sports that have returned to the actual site abandoned?
Thanks for the scores. I'll pick E-Team's pocket this weekend.
I only have 2 guys left:
"Evans (knee) was a late scratch in Friday's matchup against the Magic due to his lingering knee injury.
Recommendation: It was surprising to see Evans sit this one out due to the fact that he played (and played well) Wednesday. There is no word on whether he aggravated the knee or if this was simply a precautionary move taken by coach Keith Smart."
My 4th DNP. I'm so dumb. I wish I was better at fantasy basketball.
E Team says:
Oh no, here we go.
What was shaping up to be a ferocious firefight between the E Team and the Mr. B Team may now have been derailed by... you guessed it: a Tyreke Evans DNP.
Cue the hue and cry.
But let’s look. Did this thing come out of the blue? I suppose, if you ignore the fact that, prior to putting up a decent number on Wednesday, Tryeke had missed two straight games with a bruised knee.
Hey, it’s a tough break for Mr. B. But am I supposed to feel sorry for the guy? I just lost a match in which Kevin Love put up a 21. He's a 40-plus guy. That means I lost 20 fp's. Where was my relief?
I've had DHow go sub-20 twice. I didn't get any food stamps for that.
There was a match recently where Kevin Martin put up a 4. A four. Are we supposed to do something about that? What's the difference between Kevin Martin putting up a 4 and DeMarcus Cousins or Rajon Rondo getting suspended for being dumbasses? Or Dwyane Wade not playing? (He misses 13 games a season.)
I put six guys on the floor and they give me a 234. If Mr. B’s six all play and he loses, he loses. But if one of his guys doesn’t show up, suddenly he’s on welfare. Isn’t showing up part of the fantasy equation?
I’m sure there are guys playing in the NBA every night who are playing through injuries and putting up less-than-stellar numbers, and we’re talking about rewarding teams with guys who can’t even get on the court, some of whom are well known for not playing with injuries. We know who they are. Isn’t that part of the decision-making process on draft night?
And in case nobody noticed, Mr. B is probably gonna come in around 200 in this match. If not for simple luck of the draw, he’d be on his way to a win right now, and no one would be saying anything about the DNP.
Part II
As far as our various proposed solutions, I looked at them in the case of the current E Team-B Team match.
The Seven Man Lineup would have no effect. Ryan designates, say, Carlos Boozer, who puts up a 34 (his best-case scenario). I go either Luol Deng or Kemba Walker. Deng goes for 30, Walker 27. Mr. B’s 4-7 point edge has no bearing on the outcome. Frankly, this proposal should be taken off the table once and for all.
The 10% solution, the half-score for a designated seventh, and the lowest scoring roster player provide a measure of relief, but probably not enough to get the B’s a win, although that’s largely because he needs to get to 235.
Tom’s Second Match Theory is impossible to apply. Tyreke has another game in the match period, in Portland tonight, but we have no way of knowing whether he will play. And why are we waiting around to find out? Our entire system is based on getting whatever your guys give you in the first game their team plays. There was a brief discussion about other potential problems with this one and then it kind of went away. Good riddance, I’m thinking.
Mr. B’s recent Best-Six-of-Seven solution is not even really a DNP fix. It actually changes the whole dynamic of our system, solving the DNP in a secondary way. It’s like changing the dirty bathwater but ending up with somebody else’s baby.
The system that works best for teams that get a DNP? The one where you designate your best bench player to replace it. The question is, is the DNP victim entitled to that? Dave’s thinking seems to be “Hey, nobody should suffer in the slightest because one of his guys doesn’t play.”
Really? What about the team whose guys DO play? You put six guys on the floor and they all gave you points. The other guy’s didn’t. Why is he getting a break? Fuck him. Nobody gives a shit if my 35 guy puts up a 15 and I’m out 20 fp’s. But your weenie man doesn’t show and you get to replace him with a guy who might be a better fantasy player?
It may well be that Carlos Boozer is be one of the top six fantasy guys on Mr. B’s roster and is only on the bench because Ryan is deep at that position. Meanwhile, he’s struggling to find a productive point guard. So what? That’s fantasy basketball.
Same with Mark and his Gasol/Gortat/Lopez/Bogut issue. Tough shit. Play Byron Mullens for awhile. That’s why you got him. That’s fantasy basketball. Hey, I took Monta Ellis in the third round and he’s the shittiest guy in my lineup. Monta Ellis can be great at times. He can also give you what he’s giving me right now. That’s Monta Ellis. I knew it when I took him. Tyreke Evans? Good player. I like him. Is he Mr. Bring it Every Night. No. He’s not. I’ve had him.
Is the current DNP system perfect? No, probably not. But I don’t see a perfect replacement for it, and more importantly, I think we need to decide what exactly it is we’re trying to do with the whole DNP issue. What is the goal? What is DNP relief supposed to look like? Is there supposed to be a cost associated with not having six guys on the floor or not? (I think there is and others clearly agree with me.) It seems to me that until we answer that question, it won’t matter how many solutions we look at.
E Team says:
I see Stephen Jackson recently tweeted a warning to OKC's Serge Ibaka "Next time he run up on me, I'm goin' in his mouth."
That kind of sexual braggadocio has no place in the family-friendly world of the NBA.
Again, P4 proposes the best solution to the DNP. Your 7th man can be your DNP replacement with a 10 point reduction. Agreed the dynamic of the league would entirely change with many of the other sugglutions.
Or just leave as-is. F it. Not worth discussing.
Eric you should read this stuff you're saying and put it in another context than fantasy sports you'd be amazed at how it sounds.Invaders don't understand the problem w/Tom's 2nd chance in match period idea Eric alluded to other than the need to be clinging to the philosophy "our entire system is based on getting whatever your guys give you in the first game..."so it's a sharp conservative vs. liberal debate with Eric assuming the role of a Tea Party congressional candidate with references to cutting or eradicating government entitlement programs such as welfare and food stamps-and that's the major point of contention with the argument resistance to change...this is modification of the rules not the end of civilization as we've known it...there seems to be a compelling force within the league for change-right now there are 4 supporters I see of 2nd chance scoring for DNPs(Myself/Tom/Sean and Belvederes with Dave a likely 5th)Eric your argument about not getting help when Love gets 20 or Martin gets 4 is absurd..there's no comparsion to be made logically it's DNPs not shitty performance that's the issue-it's apples and oranges you're comparing-and it should be pointed out that all of us who are for change play in daily leagues(me with them for 4 years now) except Tom while the leaders of the conservative forces Eric and the Germans do not-so this resembles Romney's people not understanding demographic changes in the electorate
Invaders incorrectly stated that Belvedere's supported second chance solution to DNPs it was Wingos who will go with second chance not the B's who support E's and German 6 man with alternate counted half-so I see it as even split 3-3 with Sean who proposed idea looking backward for scoring as opposed to forward not yet confirming he'd go for that modification and Dave who asked for explanation of the 2nd chance variables-my assumption is that they would support the 2nd chance idea but we'll only know that once we formally vote-these are clearly the 2 most supported proposals and as such they could probably go to a formal vote-if Eric and P4 would like to harmonize their position as to how the alternate would be scored(50% seems to be the current formula) then a vote could follow-we will drop the ideas of play 7(whether taking best 6 or all 7) and searching rosters for alternates if there are no objections-if there are no objections then Invaders will ask for a vote once everybody has had their chance to comment at least once(but not limited to)more on this-there must be 5 votes for any proposal to pass or else we stay as we are-rather than abstain Invaders ask everyone to clearly state any or all objections before we vote-the 2 sides are clearly delineated as far as Invaders can see so let's work on any polishing of the 2 proposals before any voting so that the vote is more meaningful than our last one
Again Invaders ask for a harmonizing of the 6 man w/alternate idea as I see Germans have modified their 50% total point solution offered during the last vote to something else-Eric's and P4's ideas are close enough that they should probably be combined and then you can do your "voter's pamphlet" again speaking with one voice-Invaders likewise would work to get Sean to support looking to forward rather than backward scoring for DNP and chance idea
Final Nitecaps win again defeating the Wingos 200-187 Caps(Dragic-18...Kobe-50...Turner-42...Zebo-24...Baby-38...Jennings-28)HW(DWill-37...Klay-22...Galinari-27...Horford-31...Cousins-38...GHill-32...)Invaders are impressed with the emergence of Turner as a fantasy scoring force
E Team says:
Mark, why in the world would I put anything I'm saying in any other context than fantasy sports? The silly shit we're doing here has absolutely no relationship to any aspect of real life that I'm aware of.
Tyreke Evans' bruised knee and Kevin Martin's inconsistent play are apples and oranges? I couldn't disagree more. They're the same thing. You know what the ultimate shitty performance is?
Not showing up.
And here's the most insurmountable of the many problems presented by Tom's Two Chances at One Fantasy Score model: four NBA teams in this match period have only one game. If one assumes that's true on a regular basis, and I'm sure it is, that means the DNP solution becomes as random as the problem it's meant to correct.
What did the DNP victim whose team only plays once in a match period do to deserve not getting a second chance?
E Team says:
And I must say, I never expected to be compared to either Mitt Romney or a Tea Partier.
I half read most of that and now I'm tired. I'm going to watch the Blazers with a cold one in hand.
I wonder if one of the starters is a can't go at gametime, Stotts will just roll 4 out there? I mean, he should have planned for this in the preseason and known that this would happen tonight.
Nope. They have benches full of dudes that answer that call. There are lots of situations that warrant a bench/game time adjustment-bruised knees, suspensions, missing the team bus, Popovich sending everyone home one game early from the road trip.
I'm going to cue my hue(?) and cry on this topic, with the understanding that I'm a second year guy in a league with tradition. Seemingly the tradition of a communist regime, but a tradition nonetheless.
Should I just keep getting the line and let ETeam hand me my bread? Maybe. But I rather see how this plays out.
I'll support pretty much anything that allows teams to not have an automatic loss when there is a DNP (I know, I know-there are exceptions to that. Cue the hue of stat/rationale/examples/diatribe...).
The set up of draft, rare supplemental drafts (for good reason-there is no talent left in the pool) and 2x a week roster setting is already pretty inflexible. The DNP just adds too much luck into the equation-in my tear soaked opinion.
Eric there's a huge difference between playing and doing poorly and not playing-you're suggesting the player makes the call each time he's a bit hurt?no the team trainer and coaches decide these "game time decisons"-Martin playing shitty and Tyreke bruising his knee are completely unreleated(unless Martin guarded Evans and they banged knees?)Once a guy plays his performance is what you get period-but if for any reason he doesn't play (everything from turned ankle in practice/wife expecting a baby/flu/insubordination/etc.)and it's not announced at least an hour or 2 before the lock period I don't see that anybody is responsible for that among team owners and I'm happy to grant relief-I fail to see how a guy playing badly is in any way the same thing as a DNP-you seem to be analyzing it just as a matter of bottom line accounting rather than looking at the surprise factor involved with the DNPs that most people are concerned with-the 2nd chance is just that a limited window to get some points-the only reason you have to restrict relief to the match period is for continuity otherwise numbers would bleed into the next match situation and there would be perpetual early/late call nightmares
Invaders are sorry for the Romney analogy as Eric's politics are clearly left of center-I couldn't resist that though with the welfare and food stamp references-but you will never convince me that relief for DNPs is somehow related to relief for players under performing-they are not related at all
Jesus Christ Eric if your point is to filibuster this to a point that we are all sick of the topic, than you win. Mr. nomatterwhatissuggestediwilltaketheoppositestancesowecandrawouttheconversationsonobodycanevenremberwhatwewhereoriginallyfuckingtalkingabout.
Your points don't hold any weight. You take one match and want to base your whole argument on that. Refresh my memory on when someone was complaining that because one of their players didn't produce they should get some relief?
All we are trying to accomplish is to have a 6 on 6 match. Why is that so outrageous?
Invaders note that even Mr.B a supporter of the Eric/German proposal doesn't follow the recent rationale presented by Eric against the second chance proposal which to me is the cleanest easiest solution offered.No math formula/no alternate player you didn't start/the same guy either plays another time in a 3 or 4 day match period or he doesn't-the only problems then are 1)it tears at the fabric of long held prior league doctrine of first game match period stats being the only ones that count 2)It seems an unfair advantage to those of us(Eric and the Germans) that feel that poor play is somehow the same as not having the chance to play be it poorly or otherwise 3)The inequality or "luck of the draw" of scheduling variations week to week somehow render this an unfair solution because of the need(something all of us believe in I'd guess) to facilitate the major part of long held league doctrine namely twice weekly match periods
Final Eteam prevails over the Belvederes 234-197 E(Howard-45...Love-51...Rondo-49...Monta-23...Pierce-37...Duncan-29)B(Tyreke-DNP...Wade-32...Gay-43...Groff-41...Lee-47...West-34)
Final Germans destroy the Swat team 201-127 P4(Holiday-28...Harden-41...Duncan-49...Bosh-24...Ibaka-22...George-37)Swat(Parker-27...Iggy-14...LBJ-38...AJeff-DNP...Gasol-27...VJao-21)Ticket has beaten my Invaders final stats after the Blazer game
E Team says:
Okay Mark, let me get this straight, the two-tries-in-one-match-period is the "cleanest, easiest" solution we've seen? Really?
I thought the idea was to prevent DNPs from making teams uncompetitive. In case you didn't notice, it would not have made one bit of difference for Mr. B in Match 11.
And what about the part where not all teams have a second game in every match period? That makes the "solution" a totally random proposition. Yeah, that's real fucking "clean."
And how about if, instead of whining about the Tea Party and communism and whatever the fuck, you geniuses weigh in on this: Were you aware that Swat's Al Jefferson, who also DNP'd in Match 11, was a game-time decision well before tipoff on Friday? Meaning there was nothing sudden or unpredictable about it.
So who sorts shit out the first time somebody loses to a team that isn't paying any fucking attention to it's lineup but gets bailed out by the robo-replacement?
Have any of you guys thought that through? Have you thought about any of this shit? No, because you're just throwing random crap out there and then calling people names when they have the nerve to ask whether any of it makes any sense.
You guys were all jacked up about the seven-man lineup at one point. It's a fucking piece of shit.
Now you're all geeked up about the two tries in one match. Guess what? It's a piece of shit.
You guys keep frantically asking for a vote with garbage like this on the table? Fuck that. There's only two or three of us who are feeling that desperate. And that's why you're not getting your majority.
l
E Team says:
And Dave, my points "don't hold any weight?" Which ones? None of them? Not a single one?
Gosh, I suppose I should defer to the obviously superior decision-making paradigms that have guided you throughout your life.
My bad. I just thought it would make sense to actually THINK about what we're doing before we just launch some half-baked crap into space.
Didn't mean to cramp your style.
Trust me, no one is more sick of this whole exercise than I am.
Final Ticket 235 Invaders 175 Ticket(Noah-63...Monroe-21...Milsap-38...Josh-44...Curry-39..Paul-30)(Aldridge-31...Mullens-11...Young-33...Westbrook-43...JJ-39...Lowry-18)Tom edges Eric for high point money by 1 235/234
My bad Eric,
In my opinion, the two arguments that I interpreted you where attempting to make didn't bear significant weight.
As I understood your first point of argument was to compare all of the solutions to your single match with Mr. B. To call that a small sample size would be offensive to small sample sizes everywhere. Is that not a fair statement? It's cherry picking to make your point.
The next point I was addressing was lengthy comment regarding players that don't preform well. With out scanning years of blog posts, I don't ever recall anyone claiming that there was unfair competitive advantage because one of their players had a bad shooting night or was involved in a blow out.
Jesus Eric, if "frantically" asking for a vote after a month of conversation seems hurried to you? Well...I would hate to...never mind.
I do agree with Eric on the two tries in one match. Not only does give great potential for screwing up more than one match period, with out researching it, I would be willing to bet that better than 50% of the time it doesn't even address the problem.
If we where voting on the 4 or 5 proposals today, I would probably be leaning towards P4's 7th man (-10).
I don't like the potential to have a position replaced by a different position but, I guess the -10 is ideally nullify that in fashion.
I would also like to add an addendum to a bill that hasn't yet been created.
I will call the "Stacy" rule. If a team enters a second match with the same player DNP he does not gain "kicker" of what is of yet TBD.
Eric all I am saying is that there are 4 or 5 proposals on the board. Let's set a date for a vote. If you come up with a few more, than put thme up. Let's put all of them up for a vote. Let's then let's eliminate the low vote getters until we have two. When we vote and get one we than use it for the remainder of the season. At seasons end we will have had a large enough sample size to have made an informed decision on it's place in this league. If we find out it has no effect on the matches and doesn't solve anything, than we can modify it, go with a different solution or do away with it all together. We don't have to write anything in stone.
I will also say this. I have never been more fed up with and wanted to just say "fuck this league" than the year I had 13 DNP's. To say I wasn't paying attention would have been bullshit as I was the commissioner/scorekeeper that year.
For me it just suck the entertainment value straight out of this league.
Any argument that starts with "well this is the way we've always done and..." is archaic and ignorant.
Post a Comment