dboong

2019-20 Sleepers and and Busts

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Lifschitz said:

I'm going to throw a name out of left field.. Justin Anderson.

When the Mavs first drafted him I was really intrigued. I started doing deep deep research into him as a prospect. He's got a lot of tantalizing physical tools, he would come into games and have some monster put back dunks and blocks, but he's never seemed to able to get his jumper right. He had a slight shoulder hitch where he pocketed it and pushed forward and it resulted in a lot of misses and a low arc.

I have memories of him getting a ton of open jumpshots on the Mavs and just bricking time and again..

I've been watching him in some Rico Hines runs over the past week and his jumper looks really really smooth.. he's still only 25 and today he was starting for the Wizards at SF. 

Not a great line today against the Knicks, but he got 19 minutes as the starter, 9 points, 3 boards, 1 assist and 2 3's. He's someone I'm closely monitoring. This Wizards roster is so barebones, he could really carve out some value if he gets a 25 mpg starter role nightly. He has sneaky 1 / 1 / 1 potential and you can get him in the last round, essentially someone who could replicate a Miles Bridges type line with perhaps worse FG%. But he'd really need to have a remarkable turnaround in the shooting department, given his age and the fact he hasn't gotten a chance for a few years now, the opportunity is ripe for him to showcase.

 

 

Let's forgetabout Troy Brown for a minute and fantasize about Justin Anderson being a starter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, perkinsfor3 said:

Let's forgetabout Troy Brown for a minute and fantasize about Justin Anderson being a starter.

Exactly. Troy Brown should get the minutes for that Wiz team. Felt bad I missed out on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, perkinsfor3 said:

Let's forgetabout Troy Brown for a minute and fantasize about Justin Anderson being a starter.

 

Take it easy, bad teams will often find starter value out of young "vets". Firstly, I didn't insinuate he's the sure fire starter. Secondly, they can mix and match lineups, he'll get minutes on such a bad team one way or another. We see it time and again, fantasy b-ball fanatics think a real life NBA team is going to fully go into rebuild mode, and time and again those teams sign veteran players and give them minutes alongside young players. They groom young talent by taking pressure off of them and having them learn, they usually let them break out in the final few months when the season is finally in the tank. Len revived his value on Atlanta as a 25 year old, Robin Lopez has had value on the Bulls for several years when they've been absolutely terrible every season and everyone thought this is the season Robin no longer has any value, the Kings just signed Trevor Ariza to a young up and coming team, the Knicks just signed Gibson/Morris/Randle even though everyone thought they're going for a full blown rebuild.

The only real team taking advantage of young talent is Charlotte, and now you're seeing a situation where even cody zeller is going to carve out value ahead of the far more talented Hernangomez.

Fantasy isn't how things happen in the actual NBA. This idea that yeah this team sucks watch them just play 4 rookie and sophomore players around Beal isn't happening. They wil mix in guys like Bertans and Anderson, and there's room for value there. 

Keeping an eye on a guy with tools who didn't work out on other teams but has an opportunity infront of him is never a bad idea. I'm the same person who told people to get Len when he went to Atlanta and people made fun of me for suggesting it. What did he have in the final 1-2 months? Top 40 value?

Does it really hurt you to monitor a guy with tools who's still at a ripe age himself to finally showcase in a steady role for a bad team?

Edited by Lifschitz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lifschitz said:

 

It's funny I'm getting him like 12th round in mocks and I'm just laughing. Guys are picking no names or rookies, and here I have a stable player who could get you top 80-90 value with a very strong all around line and because it's ho-hum he's dropping. I'll easily take a stable role end of the bench guy who contributes, that's how you get a solid winning roster composition while other people carousel their 3 bench spots looking for the right pickup to turn out.

 

 

He’s mostly my 13th pick in mocks. Always available at the end. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, seeL said:

He’s mostly my 13th pick in mocks. Always available at the end. 

 

The reason I'm taking him in the 12th is to simulate my real league. He may or may not be available and I don't want to take that risk, I have people in my league who like Taurean and drafted him.

This system is great for him, I think he can be a perfect 3+D player and bump up his percentages. Very nice last two round value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13th pick Prince?? You must be playing in a really swallow league. How many players??

 

I play in deep leagues (20 and 30 teams) and I like the idea of Justin Andersson mentioned above.

I am considering picking him up (i had in mind also snell since he is starting but then remembered when he was starting for bucks....)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, paokmaniak said:

13th pick Prince?? You must be playing in a really swallow league. How many players??

 

I play in deep leagues (20 and 30 teams) and I like the idea of Justin Andersson mentioned above.

I am considering picking him up (i had in mind also snell since he is starting but then remembered when he was starting for bucks....)

My 13th and last pick, 13th round of standard h2h mock drafts. 

Edited by seeL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know what you are expecting from Prince. He finished 130 last year, and played only 55 and 59 games the past 2 seasons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GrandGourou said:

Don't know what you are expecting from Prince. He finished 130 last year, and played only 55 and 59 games the past 2 seasons. 

 

improvement? And btw, in the past 2 seasons he played 55 and 82.

Edited by doomz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, GrandGourou said:

Don't know what you are expecting from Prince. He finished 130 last year, and played only 55 and 59 games the past 2 seasons. 

Nobody expects him to have a TOP100 value, but if I get him at round 12-13 it could be a good choice. Just he is a late sleeper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, doomz said:

improvement? And btw, in the past 2 seasons he played 55 and 82.

 

My bad. So 59-82-55 games, and per game he finished 279-96-131. Except 3's, he doesn't offer anything special.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GrandGourou said:

 

My bad. So 59-82-55 games, and per game he finished 279-96-131. Except 3's, he doesn't offer anything special.

 

 

Jeremy Lamb was ranked #54 on BBM last season with per game averages of 15 pts, 5.5 reb, 2.2 ast, 1.1 stl & 1.5 threes on 44% FG.

Taurean Prince was nearly identical if not a fraction worse in assists, steals, blocks, and they had exactly the same FG%. Only Prince got much less rebounds (3.6 reb per game), more threes (2.2 threes per) and more TOs. I think aside from FT%, Prince has that kind of Lamb statline upside if a few things break right for him. With the possibility to start at PF I can easily see Prince matching those #s, increasing his rebounding, FG%, and hopefully cutting down on his TOs while everything else remains the same. Aside from FG% he looks to me to be a similar option to Bojan Bogdanovic who is getting drafted 3-4 rounds earlier sometimes.

 

Plus, even if there's nothing special about Prince aside from 3s, that's all Terrence Ross, Joe Harris, Harrison Barnes & Cedi are being drafted for too, but with ADPs 2-3 rounds higher. I see nothing wrong with calling him a sleeper if you expect similar or better output but Prince is getting drafted waaay after them.

 

Prince is one of the best spot up shooters in the entire NBA, so I agree he's being slept on. Haven't been drawing much attention to him because with his opportunity I think he'll smash his 145 ADP. Last season he was in the 89th percentile for spot-up shooting and was an elite catch-and-shoot player. He sucks on defense so he doesn't get a lot of run, but I think with Kurucs in the legal doghouse he's one their best options at PF and should continue to get some run on the wings.

Edited by s-kayos
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GrandGourou said:

 

My bad. So 59-82-55 games, and per game he finished 279-96-131. Except 3's, he doesn't offer anything special.

 

 

The drop in the ranking from 96 --> 131 is mostly due to reduction in mins as he still improved on Pts/3s/FG with a drop in Rbs/Blks (effort cats).

He has an opportunity and seems to be putting in the effort. Also playing more PF should help nudge up the Rbs/Blks.

Definite upside there and it wouldn't surprise me if he put up better #s, especially with Kyrie, CLV and Dinwiddie as playmakers and better shooters around him.  

Projecting 14/5/2, 2.2 3s, 1.1 stl, 0.5 Blk on 45% / 84%  top 80 upside

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, s-kayos said:

 

Jeremy Lamb was ranked #54 on BBM last season with per game averages of 15 pts, 5.5 reb, 2.2 ast, 1.1 stl & 1.5 threes on 44% FG.

Taurean Prince was nearly identical if not a fraction worse in assists, steals, blocks, and they had exactly the same FG%. Only Prince got much less rebounds (3.6 reb per game), more threes (2.2 threes per) and more TOs. I think aside from FT%, Prince has that kind of Lamb statline upside if a few things break right for him. With the possibility to start at PF I can easily see Prince matching those #s, increasing his rebounding, FG%, and hopefully cutting down on his TOs while everything else remains the same. Aside from FG% he looks to me to be a similar option to Bojan Bogdanovic who is getting drafted 3-4 rounds earlier sometimes.

 

Plus, even if there's nothing special about Prince aside from 3s, that's all Terrence Ross, Joe Harris, Harrison Barnes & Cedi are being drafted for too, but with ADPs 2-3 rounds higher. I see nothing wrong with calling him a sleeper if you expect similar or better output but Prince is getting drafted waaay after them.

 

Prince is one of the best spot up shooters in the entire NBA, so I agree he's being slept on. Haven't been drawing much attention to him because with his opportunity I think he'll smash his 145 ADP. Last season he was in the 89th percentile for spot-up shooting and was an elite catch-and-shoot player. He sucks on defense so he doesn't get a lot of run, but I think with Kurucs in the legal doghouse he's one their best options at PF and should continue to get some run on the wings.

You’re right. 

 

That highlights the blind reliance on per game rankings.  There is much more difference between Harden/Ad than the next crop of players than people realize.  A healthy AD is worth like Lillard and Horford combined.   But people will consistently undervalue Harden/Ad, particularly in auction.  People think there’s a top 5.  If you’re looking at per game theres really a top two: Harden/AD.  Then another two: Curry/KAT.  And Giannis is closer to Lillard/Jokic than he is AD.  

 

Conversely, at the bottom there’s minuscule differences between the 75-150 ranked players.  I picked up Prince from the waver wire but he’s not substantially different from Batum who is a top 100 player.  The back three picks in drafts is really just who you fee like taking.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StifleTower2 said:

A healthy AD is worth like Lillard and Horford combined.

What is the logic behind this statement?  

While AD is good, he is not better than Lillard + Horford combined, far from it,.   AD has better FG% (.5 vs .461 combined), blocks (2.5 vs 1.8) and TOs (2.2 vs 4.6) and is worse in every other category based on last year numbers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Gile Pile said:

What is the logic behind this statement?  

While AD is good, he is not better than Lillard + Horford combined, far from it,.   AD has better FG% (.5 vs .461 combined), blocks (2.5 vs 1.8) and TOs (2.2 vs 4.6) and is worse in every other category based on last year numbers

The logic behind the statement is that AD had a z score of 1.05 last year and that was actually a down year due to playing only the first half in about 20 games last year.  His actual z score is more like 1.1.  

 

Whereas, Lillard has a z score of .51 and Horford .24.  So combined that’s .75.  

 

While waiver wire players typically have negative z score, you can get 0 z score players for practically free.  For example, AD and Smart are significantly better as a pair than Lillard and Horford. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, StifleTower2 said:

The logic behind the statement is that AD had a z score of 1.05 last year and that was actually a down year due to playing only the first half in about 20 games last year.  His actual z score is more like 1.1.  

 

Whereas, Lillard has a z score of .51 and Horford .24.  So combined that’s .75.  

 

While waiver wire players typically have negative z score, you can get 0 z score players for practically free.  For example, AD and Smart are significantly better as a pair than Lillard and Horford. 

Is your league using z-score   or standard categories to determine who wins? 😀 

z-score is useful, but it is not gold standard how good (or bad) player is.

AD has an excellent z-score but he is not better than Lillard + Horford combination in either roto or H2H.  The numbers do not add up to support this (assuming same number of games for each player in any given week).

On the other hand, AD + any  relevant player > Lillard + Horford
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gile Pile said:

Is your league using z-score   or standard categories to determine who wins? 😀 

z-score is useful, but it is not gold standard how good (or bad) player is.

AD has an excellent z-score but he is not better than Lillard + Horford combination in either roto or H2H.  The numbers do not add up to support this (assuming same number of games for each player in any given week).

On the other hand, AD + any  relevant player > Lillard + Horford
 

This is a non-sensical question that doesn't even make linguistic sense let alone logical sense.  😀 

It's like asking do you prefer azure or blue?  

Z score is a compilation of different inputs.  You could use standard 9 cats as your inputs or anything else.  So yes any roto league is determined by comparing the z score of your top 10 players against anyone else's.  The winner in any roto league is the one with the highest z score.  H2H is different bc there are matchups, punt strategies, health, playoff schedule concerns.

 

Z score actually the purest form of how good a player is because it takes all of your inputs, compares them to the median for those categories, and adds them together to develop one score.  It's simply putting a numerical value on your inputs, in this case 9 cat.  So when Davis has a z score of more than Lillard and Horford combined, it means that he is more valuable than both of them combined.  It means that he alone exceeds in the median more than Lillard and Horford exceed the median combined.  

 

Your counter-argument is absurd.  Clearly if you played in a league with no games cap and no cap to the size of your team then having 20 players is worth more than 10.  But given that no league has those parameters it's a straw man.

 

When you say that AD plus any relevant player > Lillard and Horford that's what I'm saying as well.  That's my argument precisely.  Why?  Because AD is so valuable that when combined with a random waiver wire pickup he will be better than Lillard and Horford.  Given that waiver wire pickups are essentially "free", costs only a roster slot, then that therefore means AD is more valuable than Lillard + Horford.  Obviously no single player is going to be better than a first round player and a midround player when you lazily add their stat lines.  That's not what valuable means in this context.  I didn't say AD's statistical output alone is greater than those two. 

 

Anyway, even if you merely lazily compare their statlines together AD is still MUCH more valuable than you give him credit for.  You merely combined their categories and saw those two "won" more categories.  Yet AD "wins" blocks by a much more significant margin than those two win any other category.  So again, even if interpret your argument in the most charitable way possible, it still doesn't make sense.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, StifleTower2 said:

A healthy AD is worth like Lillard and Horford combined

We will agree to disagree.  How did AD and his great z-score worked out last year? 😛

 

11 minutes ago, StifleTower2 said:

Your counter-argument is absurd.  Clearly if you played in a league with no games cap and no cap to the size of your team then having 20 players is worth more than 10.  But given that no league has those parameters it's a straw man.

I am pretty sure that every league has cap on roster size

 

13 minutes ago, StifleTower2 said:

Yet AD "wins" blocks by a much more significant margin than those two win any other category. 

Wining  by 1 or 20 blocks does not make a difference. You won.  What counts is how many categories you won, not the margins.

Let's leave it here and agree to disagree

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, StifleTower2 said:

This is a non-sensical question that doesn't even make linguistic sense let alone logical sense.  😀 

It's like asking do you prefer azure or blue?  

Z score is a compilation of different inputs.  You could use standard 9 cats as your inputs or anything else.  So yes any roto league is determined by comparing the z score of your top 10 players against anyone else's.  The winner in any roto league is the one with the highest z score.  H2H is different bc there are matchups, punt strategies, health, playoff schedule concerns.

 

Z score actually the purest form of how good a player is because it takes all of your inputs, compares them to the median for those categories, and adds them together to develop one score.  It's simply putting a numerical value on your inputs, in this case 9 cat.  So when Davis has a z score of more than Lillard and Horford combined, it means that he is more valuable than both of them combined.  It means that he alone exceeds in the median more than Lillard and Horford exceed the median combined.  

 

Your counter-argument is absurd.  Clearly if you played in a league with no games cap and no cap to the size of your team then having 20 players is worth more than 10.  But given that no league has those parameters it's a straw man.

 

When you say that AD plus any relevant player > Lillard and Horford that's what I'm saying as well.  That's my argument precisely.  Why?  Because AD is so valuable that when combined with a random waiver wire pickup he will be better than Lillard and Horford.  Given that waiver wire pickups are essentially "free", costs only a roster slot, then that therefore means AD is more valuable than Lillard + Horford.  Obviously no single player is going to be better than a first round player and a midround player when you lazily add their stat lines.  That's not what valuable means in this context.  I didn't say AD's statistical output alone is greater than those two. 

 

Anyway, even if you merely lazily compare their statlines together AD is still MUCH more valuable than you give him credit for.  You merely combined their categories and saw those two "won" more categories.  Yet AD "wins" blocks by a much more significant margin than those two win any other category.  So again, even if interpret your argument in the most charitable way possible, it still doesn't make sense.  

 

What I'm wondering about z-score is that would the roto winner really have the highest z-score 100% of the time?  Say you were to draft a team solely based on z-score last year, and since its roto let's say total value.  And by just going on z-score value, you might end up with top 60 players like Ibaka, Tucker, McGee, Lamb, Lopez for your 4th-8th round picks...  Would you still win your league?   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Gile Pile said:

We will agree to disagree.  How did AD and his great z-score worked out last year? 😛

 

I am pretty sure that every league has cap on roster size

 

Wining  by 1 or 20 blocks does not make a difference. You won.  What counts is how many categories you won, not the margins.

Let's leave it here and agree to disagree

 

AD got injured.  If the player you’re arguing about gets injured obviously that negates his z score.  Is your argument not to draft AD bc he will get injured again or that you don’t trust his z score?  Two separate arguments. 

 

You’re still missing the point   A team isn’t one player or two players or twenty.  In roto your top 10 players count.  So if you have a player such as AD who can carry you in blocks alone then that’s more valuable than exceeding the median by a little.  

 

Now in H2H it’s true that cats are binary.  Winning by a little or a lot doesn’t matter.  But that doesn’t negate that AD carries you a lot more in blocks in addition to the other cats.   

 

There’s nothing to disagree about bc I’m not positing an argument.  It’s not a statement of opinion that AD’s zscore>Lillard’s plus Horford’s.  That’s a statement of fact.  If you deny that then that’s your prerogative.  But to end the argument ok I’ll agree to disagree.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, hipriest69 said:

 

What I'm wondering about z-score is that would the roto winner really have the highest z-score 100% of the time?  Say you were to draft a team solely based on z-score last year, and since its roto let's say total value.  And by just going on z-score value, you might end up with top 60 players like Ibaka, Tucker, McGee, Lamb, Lopez for your 4th-8th round picks...  Would you still win your league?   

 

 

I knew someone would point that out.  I debated whether to dive into that.  But that’s way way beyond the scope of this argument.  If I had to outline every possible scenario it would take too long and no one would read it.   But I think suffice it to say 90% of the time the winner would be the one with the highest z score. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, StifleTower2 said:

I knew someone would point that out.  I debated whether to dive into that.  But that’s way way beyond the scope of this argument.  If I had to outline every possible scenario it would take too long and no one would read it.   But I think suffice it to say 90% of the time the winner would be the one with the highest z score. 

 

That's pretty much what I was thinking...because you could also have a high z-score tied 5 cats and be somewhat poor- average in the other 4 cats...and subsequently not win in roto where you need more diversity and at minimum 6 strong cats but probably 7 or 8 is even better.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, hipriest69 said:

 

That's pretty much what I was thinking...because you could also have a high z-score tied 5 cats and be somewhat poor- average in the other 4 cats...and subsequently not win in roto where you need more diversity and at minimum 6 strong cats but probably 7 or 8 is even better.  

Conversely, you could have a punt FT/To team and get 1s in those two cats and get 10s in the other 7.  You could finish with 72 points which *might* win your league but if your score in FT/To was bad enough you might not finish first in z score.  Those are outlier type scenarios though.  Generally it’s just the z score of your top 10 guys versus the z score of your 11 competitors. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, StifleTower2 said:

You’re right. 

 

That highlights the blind reliance on per game rankings.  There is much more difference between Harden/Ad than the next crop of players than people realize.  A healthy AD is worth like Lillard and Horford combined.   But people will consistently undervalue Harden/Ad, particularly in auction.  People think there’s a top 5.  If you’re looking at per game theres really a top two: Harden/AD.  Then another two: Curry/KAT.  And Giannis is closer to Lillard/Jokic than he is AD.  

 

Conversely, at the bottom there’s minuscule differences between the 75-150 ranked players.  I picked up Prince from the waver wire but he’s not substantially different from Batum who is a top 100 player.  The back three picks in drafts is really just who you fee like taking.  

I agree that 75-100 guys are usually not much more valuable than guys around 150. Value drops off a lot quicker early in drafts. 

Also, you would have to add the z-score for the player paired with AD, which is almost certainly negative for a waiver wire guy. I agree that the difference between AD/Harden last year and everyone else was more than most people realize and that we should compare how much value players add over waiver-wire players, but only 60 guys had a positive z-score on BBM last year if you are using that as a reference. Then you can't assume a z-score of 0 for the guy paired with AD unless you think you can get a top-60 player from the wire (although you might be able to get one for cheap like suggested in a later post, in which case you are right).

 

Here is an experiment to test things. I switched to Embiid+Horford instead to make the stats easier to compare

AD: 25.9/12.0/3.9 with 0.9 threes, 1.6stl,2.4blk on 51.7%fg (18.3 attempts), 79.4%ft (7.7att),2.7tos

Embiid+Horford: 41.1/20.3/7.8 with 2.3threes,1.6stl,3.2blk on 50.2%fg (29.3att), 80.7%ft (11.5att),5.0tos 

Then a guy to pair with AD would need to average this to get the same value as Embiid+Horford:

15.2/8.3/3.9 with 1.4 threes, 0.0steals,0.8blocks on 47.7%fg (11.0att),83.3%ft(3.8att),2.3tos.

Even if you increase the steals a bit and reduce everything else but turnovers, you would need something like 13/6/3 or better with strong solid peripheral stats. That would be difficult to get off the waiver wire in most leagues. Prince's stats last year would only be enough in 3 categories. Then again, I don't expect Horford to put up top-30 value again, so I might take AD over him+Embiid or Lillard anyway depending on the league.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.