The 10 = 20 NBA Surprise Partner Draft SF2 : UK/Nos vs Ducey/Stakes

Nosferatu

Nosferatu

Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Posts
10,442
Reaction score
11,826
Bookie:
$ 241,091.00
Location
Texas
UK/NOS

1st Quarter
Jo Jo White
World B. Free
Mark Aguirre
Kristaps Porzingis
Artis Gilmore

2nd Quarter
Gail Goodrich
Earl "The Pearl" Monroe
Billy Cunningham
George McGinnis
Karl-Anthony Towns

3rd Quarter
Walt "Clyde" Frazier
Clyde Drexler
Glen Rice
Tom Chambers
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

4th Quarter
Magic Johnson
Reggie Miller
Scottie Pippen
Connie Hawkins
Pau Gasol

VS

DUCEY/STAKES

Quarter 1:
PG: Tim Hardaway
SG: Allan Houston
SF: Cedric Maxwell
PF: Rasheed Wallace
C: Vlade Divac

Quarter 2:
PG: Ben Simmons
SG; Sidney Moncrief
SF: Shawn Marion
PF: Shawn Kemp
C: David Robinson

Quarter 3:
PG: Steph Curry
SG: Demar Derozan
SF: Chris Mullin
PF: Detlef Schremp
C: Chris Bosh

Quarter 4:
PG: Mookie Blaylock
SG: Paul Pierce
SF: Kawhi Leonard
PF: Dirk Nowitzki
C: Dikembe Mutombo
 
UK/NOS - 5
DUCEY/STAKES -

VOTED - Meebs, Sushi, Milk, Nos, UK

First to 5
 
Last edited:
British Vampire
 
This is again super close. Think Nos/UK have the first decidedly. Ducey/UK have the edge in the 2nd but wish they had some outside shooting there. UK/Nos have the 3rd. I think Ducey and Stakes actually have a good matchup against their 4th with some cross matches to defend. But I think Nos/UK build a big enough lead and hang on.

Nos/UK.
 
I really like their 2nd and especially 4th quarters but I do think we have a better team.
 
UK/Nos
 
I got UK/Nos in this one as Nos didn't draft a single guy from the last 30 years. so as we often state in the nba boards the skill and talent in the nba has depreciated.

I'm assuming we are playing with a 3 point line so the added advantage of having a team full of players who never or barely played with one would be pretty clutch.
 
But yes our first quarter is pretty bad
 
stakesarehigh said:
I got UK/Nos in this one as Nos didn't draft a single guy from the last 30 years. so as we often state in the nba boards the skill and talent in the nba has depreciated.

I'm assuming we are playing with a 3 point line so the added advantage of having a team full of players who never or barely played with one would be pretty clutch.
Click to expand...



You're such a fun person. Maybe cry more, it's delightful...
 
Nosferatu said:
You're such a fun person. Maybe cry more, it's delightful...
Click to expand...

As I said the first quarter is bad...no getting around that. I just think voting in general with these older guys doesn't even attempt to take into account how they would work within the new rules.

A guy like Simmons would be an absolute monster if the outside shot wasn't such a priority as it is now. Even in a league where a 3 is demanded from a PG he thrives and can defend anyone on the floor.

Unless its a phase draft that's why you don't see me take hardly any 3s or 4s that cannot shoot 3's.. that's the game now.
 
stakesarehigh said:
As I said the first quarter is bad...no getting around that. I just think voting in general with these older guys doesn't even attempt to take into account how they would work within the new rules.

A guy like Simmons would be an absolute monster if the outside shot wasn't such a priority as it is now. Even in a league where a 3 is demanded from a PG he thrives and can defend anyone on the floor.

Unless its a phase draft that's why you don't see me take hardly any 3s or 4s that cannot shoot 3's.. that's the game now.
Click to expand...




Being stupid has always been your issue. Why are we drafting players from yesterday and comparing them to today's players when everything about every sport is completely different now, you and your lack of any real sports knowledge have always acted like the athletes of yesterday wouldn't have used the advantages players from today have or adapted to the game today. They are simply not as good because they played a different game a long time ago.
 
Nosferatu said:
Being stupid has always been your issue. Why are we drafting players from yesterday and comparing them to today's players when everything about every sport is completely different now, you and your lack of any real sports knowledge have always acted like the athletes of yesterday wouldn't have used the advantages players from today have or adapted to the game today. They are simply not as good because they played a different game a long time ago.
Click to expand...

I don't discount players from yesterday altogether. Nba pre Magic and Bird is not even remotely as good. We are talking about a league that was on tape delay until the 80s. Exposure leads to a whole new level of development from the time a kid can dribble a basketball.

I too have won or done well with guys from the 70s but I can't see how a team comprised largely of them can be smoking the entire draft. Maybe that's my bias but I don't get it.
 
I just think we go with what wins versus what is reality. We've beaten the subject to death but this infatuation with receivers and secondary in the NFL doesn't translate at all in the real world. Yes a CB 1 is a top five position. But other than that you can win titles with excellent qb play and outstanding line play. I've gotten to the point where I neglect the OL because it almost never wins our drafts even though it should.

The biggest difference with the Browns this year versus last was Baker emerging and them having a top 5 OL. That's the reality of the league rather than matchups decided on paper.
 
stakesarehigh said:
I don't discount players from yesterday altogether. Nba pre Magic and Bird is not even remotely as good. We are talking about a league that was on tape delay until the 80s. Exposure leads to a whole new level of development from the time a kid can dribble a basketball.

I too have won or done well with guys from the 70s but I can't see how a team comprised largely of them can be smoking the entire draft. Maybe that's my bias but I don't get it.
Click to expand...
No you are biased, it's just facts and how the game has evolved. That's why we should seperate eras when drafting for NBA...I've said this before.
The overall talent in the league today is without a doubt better, you have more athletes and talent across the board. You have guys that are on the bench that could play back in the day, those are just facts but you say that about a lot of the main sports. I mean look at the NFL, you have 4.4 guys at LB all over the field that are as strong as an ox, it's unfair. It's so difficult to win a golf tournament these days with all the talent and young talent....every sport is evolving which makes sense bc of all analytics is involving, they have so many more methods to improve their skills and become experts at their craft. I really do think in the NBA it makes the BIGGEST difference though, a couple of huge advantages would just be athleticism...some people think they just play no defense and that is absurb. How hard is it to guard a 6'11" guy that can run the floor like a 6'3" guard and is a sharpshooter. When you get into the 60's and 70's they never saw that...so they would have no idea how to stop that player, I mean they didn't even have to defend the 3 point line...they would be at a major disadvantage just from that aspect of the game.
 
Nosferatu said:
Being stupid has always been your issue. Why are we drafting players from yesterday and comparing them to today's players when everything about every sport is completely different now, you and your lack of any real sports knowledge have always acted like the athletes of yesterday wouldn't have used the advantages players from today have or adapted to the game today. They are simply not as good because they played a different game a long time ago.
Click to expand...
Well when you have players from the 60's-70's matching up against a team full of 00's and 10's guys...it's head to head. It's hard to compare a player just on greatness in their era without taking into account their skillset. If a guy can shoot 3's at a high level and another player never defended 3's in their career...it makes a HUGE difference.

But this is like any other sport and that's why we should treat this sport differently. We've had this discussion for years. It's not going to work and it will never work in the voting process.

Who is better Earl Monroe or Klay Thompson? If you go by era you probably take Earl...but I don't think anyone really thinks he is better than Klay Thompson, one of the best shooters of all-time and he is a lockdown defender.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top