|
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: NetsGM on November 30, 2005, 09:07:03 PM 21) Cavs - Gert Hornick (SF)
22) Wolves - John Gordy (SG) 23) Bulls - Doyle Fee (C) 24) Mavs - Brian Wright (PF) 25) Spurs - Anibal Landes (SG) (Traded for Spurs 2013 Pick) 26) Cavs - Mitchell Hernandez (SG) 27) Clippers - Stefan Holston (PG) 28.) Hornets - Kevin Cox (PG) 29) Pacers - Jacinto Mangan (PG) Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: CavsGM on November 30, 2005, 09:11:04 PM Was close to trading the 21st pick to the Spurs for their 2013 pick, but I really wanted Hornick. But I ended up getting that pick anyway for the 25th. I think Hornick is a great prospect, with his potential.
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: BullsGM-old on December 01, 2005, 09:01:53 AM I'm hoping Fee develops into something decent. He has the potential to be a solid defensive player and could be very well rounded offensively
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: ClippersGM-old on December 01, 2005, 11:09:04 AM I think it is the 3rd point guard I draft at around pick 27 (three years in a row). And again... this looks like a sure big time future all star. :lol: Well, let's at least hope that his potential is wrong! :?
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: RaptorsGM on December 01, 2005, 11:40:24 AM Honestly cannot belive Holston dropped that far, Had him ranked top 13.
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: ClippersGM-old on December 01, 2005, 03:53:55 PM Yeah... first team all-american. I hope he can show that in the pro's as well.
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: MavsGM on December 01, 2005, 04:18:21 PM I got the two guys I wanted in this draft. I think the reason Stefan Holston drop was that he is overachieving in 8 cateories. Yea, count that 8.
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: NetsGM on December 01, 2005, 05:03:34 PM he wasn't overachieving in 8.
Potential doesn't list +'s or -'s. So if he has an A+ for current and an A for potential, he's not overachieving. He was overachieving in 1, underachieving in 1. the guy's a flat out terrible defender. But if that potential's wrong he could be as good as Lincoln Lord. Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: WolvesGM on December 01, 2005, 05:08:39 PM Just out of curiosity, when you say 'overachieving' and 'underachieving' What are you guys talking about?
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: MavsGM on December 01, 2005, 05:16:14 PM don't know I got the overachieving and underachieving from Nets and I got it wrong. :oops:
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: NetsGM on December 01, 2005, 05:19:23 PM Overachieving = current production is higher than listed potential at that rating
Underachiving = current potential is less than his potential at that category. Basically: Overachieving = no room for improvement Underachieving = room to improve My theory (and what I based the #7 pick on) is that if a guy has more categories that he has room to improve on than one's where he's overachieving, when he gets switched over to the FBB draft file he'll have a higher potential. And it was what I used to decide to take lord (+2 in underachieving categories) vs. Arbogast (-2 in categories, meaning he's overachiving in 2 more categories than he's underachieving in). Meaning because of that I think Lord's potential (which is scouted as a B) is higher than Arbogast's potential (scouted as an A). Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: CelticsGM on December 01, 2005, 05:30:01 PM wow, bods at full speed again. And totally on target at that !
Guys, make some bookmarks, this is a keeper lesson for free here ... 8) Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: HornetsGM on December 01, 2005, 05:43:31 PM Is this theory upheld when you look at last year's big improvers? Gutierrez for example?
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: CelticsGM on December 01, 2005, 05:52:01 PM Quote from: HornetsGM Is this theory upheld when you look at last year's big improvers? Gutierrez for example? guess we have to wait for the next TC from Max to find out. and then again, even that is no 100% correct answer. Why? Well, I tried to simulate some TCs (took a league file saved before TC and did that TC over and over again) to get an feeling how far apart TC results could be spread and what i found out was frustrating. Sure, an young A pot player in his 3rd or 4th season (where the potential ist just about real) will improve in 7-8 of 10 TCs ... BUT ... there are 2 or 3 TCs where he either stays pat or actually drops ratings, sometimes even considerably. So you KNOW this guy is good and is likely to improve a lot, and then you get such a TC #9 or 10. Just killing a season for you (and before you ask, NO, neither did i check if that drop of ratings actually did alter his performance nor did i check if he is more likely to make that drop up with BIG improvement in the next TC ... feel free to spend some hours/days in FBB to find out) :wink: That's the random factor in here and we just have to hope for good TC luck ... 8) Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: HornetsGM on December 01, 2005, 06:05:09 PM Well, for someone like Max, who improved that much, the odds are that he has true A potential. I don't have the draft details file from last year, so I don't know how Max looked.
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: MavsGM on December 01, 2005, 06:49:49 PM I have been in many leagues and at TC there always one players that blows up. Take it for what it worths.
Title: 21st-29th Picks of the First Round Post by: NetsGM on December 01, 2005, 07:12:27 PM Unfortunately I don't have the draft details from the prior year either. So I don't know Max's collegiate ratings.
Before I even became commish here I played the single player aspect of FBB quite a bit. And TC's were so random that I sim'd the same sim over, and over, and over. And what Celtics said is completely correct. You can save a sim right before TC, run tc. load up the prior save, run tc again. Results can be DRASTICALLY different. |