This topic contains 8 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by 
King Calucha 11 years, 4 months ago.
- AuthorPosts
- Posted on: Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:47am #59182
negguaryParticipantHas this season had the most trades in NBA history, starting from the summer that involved Kevin Love and A. Wiggins. If so is this a reflection of the “NEW NBA” which is ran off of analytics and salary cap tricks??
0 - Posted on: Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:06pm #967792
Magic JordanParticipantChad ford just tweeted that today alone 7 draft picks and 36 players switched teams, at least. That tells me that you are right. Analytical people don’t value actual players as much as they do hypothetical ones (draft picks). The numbers bare that out.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:06pm #967643
Magic JordanParticipantChad ford just tweeted that today alone 7 draft picks and 36 players switched teams, at least. That tells me that you are right. Analytical people don’t value actual players as much as they do hypothetical ones (draft picks). The numbers bare that out.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 02/19/2015 - 1:16pm #967685
King CaluchaParticipant"Analytical people don’t value actual players as much as they do hypothetical ones (draft picks)"
I completely disagree with this statement. If I’m getting rid of a player who is no longer in my team plans, I’d rather get a pick and select someone who fits my team in the long term rather than a bunch of mediocre players. It has nothing to do with stats or numbers.
0- Posted on: Thu, 02/19/2015 - 4:09pm #967725
Magic JordanParticipant"If I’m getting rid of a player who is no longer in my team plans, I’d rather get a pick and select someone who fits my team in the long term rather than a bunch of mediocre players."
Well you just agreed with me then. If you’re willing to trade a contributing player for someone who isn’t even in the league yet, then yeah… you value a hypothetical player more than a real one. It has everything to do with stats and numbers because by your logic, if a player was a "superstar" then you wouldn’t trade him. But the fact is, there aren’t enough superstars for every team, if you are cool with your team playing lottery roullete for the next ten years while you trade away solid players… that every team needs to win while you wait for your "superstar" that’s your prerogative. Hinkie’s sales pitch has worked on you. If a guy who just won the ROY and has only been in the league for a year and a half isn’t in your plans, then you simply don’t have one. Believe it or not, good teams need mediocre players too, in fact, they are most compiled of mediocre players.
I shouldn’t have said Analytical people though… I should have said the new breed of GM.
0- Posted on: Thu, 02/19/2015 - 4:51pm #967743
King CaluchaParticipant"Hinkie’s sales pitch has worked on you"
Can’t stop laughing at that.
First off… man… I never said it should be all or nothing. I never said I ageed with Hinkie’s moves. I just said that if a player is going to lose trade value and your team isn’t particularly good, then you should move the player before it’s too late (like Denver).New breed of GM? San Antonio and Boston 1996 anyone? It sounds hypocritical when you only criticize the teams that didn’t make it right.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 02/19/2015 - 4:51pm #967892
King CaluchaParticipant"Hinkie’s sales pitch has worked on you"
Can’t stop laughing at that.
First off… man… I never said it should be all or nothing. I never said I ageed with Hinkie’s moves. I just said that if a player is going to lose trade value and your team isn’t particularly good, then you should move the player before it’s too late (like Denver).New breed of GM? San Antonio and Boston 1996 anyone? It sounds hypocritical when you only criticize the teams that didn’t make it right.
0
- Posted on: Thu, 02/19/2015 - 4:09pm #967874
Magic JordanParticipant"If I’m getting rid of a player who is no longer in my team plans, I’d rather get a pick and select someone who fits my team in the long term rather than a bunch of mediocre players."
Well you just agreed with me then. If you’re willing to trade a contributing player for someone who isn’t even in the league yet, then yeah… you value a hypothetical player more than a real one. It has everything to do with stats and numbers because by your logic, if a player was a "superstar" then you wouldn’t trade him. But the fact is, there aren’t enough superstars for every team, if you are cool with your team playing lottery roullete for the next ten years while you trade away solid players… that every team needs to win while you wait for your "superstar" that’s your prerogative. Hinkie’s sales pitch has worked on you. If a guy who just won the ROY and has only been in the league for a year and a half isn’t in your plans, then you simply don’t have one. Believe it or not, good teams need mediocre players too, in fact, they are most compiled of mediocre players.
I shouldn’t have said Analytical people though… I should have said the new breed of GM.
0
- Posted on: Thu, 02/19/2015 - 1:16pm #967835
King CaluchaParticipant"Analytical people don’t value actual players as much as they do hypothetical ones (draft picks)"
I completely disagree with this statement. If I’m getting rid of a player who is no longer in my team plans, I’d rather get a pick and select someone who fits my team in the long term rather than a bunch of mediocre players. It has nothing to do with stats or numbers.
0 - AuthorPosts
| You must be logged in to reply to this topic. | Login |