|
Post by ajant on Jun 8, 2008 3:37:17 GMT -5
for expansion draft, if you don't mind my asking
|
|
|
Post by rien2244 on Jun 8, 2008 3:40:47 GMT -5
Only two players can be picked from each team, and they had Raymond Felton and Rasheed Wallace chosen, so none of their other players can be taken. Im 99.5% sure thats it anyway.
Either that or its some huge conspiracy by the mods to make atlanta better so none of us can win either... nahhh
|
|
|
Post by ajant on Jun 8, 2008 3:51:29 GMT -5
Only two players can be picked from each team, and they had Raymond Felton and Rasheed Wallace chosen, so none of their other players can be taken. Im 99.5% sure thats it anyway. Either that or its some huge conspiracy by the mods to make atlanta better so none of us can win either... nahhh i never saw that rule about 2 players before, so i think i have the right to ask, no sarcasm necessary. anyways i'd like to ask mods(providing there is no conspiracy) to reconsider that rule. there are very few solid players in this draft and most of them are owned by utah and atlanta. this rule limits our options even further. i think that 6 protected players is quite enough for every team and that it's unfair to expansion teams to give old teams any additional advantage. i agreed to take expansion team, i like the challenge, but this rule is favoring old teams over expansion teams. it's not my fault i didn't know about this league last year, or i would have played it
|
|
|
Post by rien2244 on Jun 8, 2008 3:57:00 GMT -5
ooops sorry i was kidding i didnt mean to sound sarcastic I wasnt really aware of that rule either until i went looking when you asked, so i dunno. You do make a point however, so im sure it'll be discussed.
|
|
|
Post by rockndoc on Jun 8, 2008 6:44:20 GMT -5
As one who has moaned about some things already, the two player rule is #2 in the list of rules for the expansion draft. So, on that one we have no complaint. The Exp. Draft Rules has its own sub thread. (your welcome 22)
|
|
|
Post by rockndoc on Jun 8, 2008 6:47:24 GMT -5
BTW: The rules were first posted on May 21st.
|
|
|
Post by ajant on Jun 8, 2008 8:59:06 GMT -5
As one who has moaned about some things already, the two player rule is #2 in the list of rules for the expansion draft. So, on that one we have no complaint. The Exp. Draft Rules has its own sub thread. (your welcome 22) i went through all the threads before i signed up, but i missed that rule. i think that at the time i read this thread, Miege22's post said something like: "2nd rule - i know there was supposed to be a rule here but i can't remember it at the moment", which of course is nobody's fault, you can't keep it all in your head at all times. the post was edited at a later time: « Last Edit: Jun 4, 2008, 4:51pm by Miege22 » so if that rule was inserted later into a place where it was supposed to be all along, participants should have been notified of it. but i might be wrong, it is also possible that the rule was there all the time and i missed it while going over all sub forums of this board, i'm not above making mistakes or above admitting my mistake if there was one. Miege22 will settle that for us i want to say that i'm not here to chase any conspiracies, i'm here to play. all i want is fair and competitive league, that's the only kind i play either way, my objection to the rule still remains though. atlanta's 9th best player is still better then several expansion teams' best player so i believe it is unfair to further protect old teams in the expansion draft. 20 teams times 6 protected players equals 120 players. most, if not all, of those will be top 150 players so 10 expansion teams would have to distribute just 30 top 150 players amongst themselves without this rule(and barely few of those 30 are top 100 players, none are top 50 except maybe sheed), but with this rule additional players from top 150 become protected so 10 of us have even less solid players to choose from. i think it's obvious it's unfair to allow that. as i said, i took expansion team because i wanted a challenge, i could have switched it for rockets when they became available, but i wanted to build champion from the bottom, but in order to do that i need fair treatment. expansion teams didn't even get a chance at top picks in the rookie draft, but picks 4-13. i really think 6 protected players + a chance to get top 3 picks in rookie draft is more then enough for old teams i said what i had to say. if it offends anyone i'm sorry, but that's the way i see it. now i leave it at the hands of the mods and their sense of what's fair
|
|
|
Post by kgppra on Jun 8, 2008 11:16:10 GMT -5
I agree with ajant its kinda silly to only allow two players to be taken from a team that has 8 good players by a team with maybe one good player.... hmmm doesnt seem fair but whatever
|
|
|
Post by rockndoc on Jun 8, 2008 13:31:36 GMT -5
Actually, this rule hurts the expansion team, but look at it from say, Atlanta's perspective.
They built a nice roster and could lose a half dozen players? Thats not fair either, so this rule seems alright to me. Or they could have given each team 8 franchise players and we would have really been picking the bottom of the barrel.
|
|
|
Post by ajant on Jun 8, 2008 14:04:51 GMT -5
Actually, this rule hurts the expansion team, but look at it from say, Atlanta's perspective. They built a nice roster and could lose a half dozen players? Thats not fair either, so this rule seems alright to me. Or they could have given each team 8 franchise players and we would have really been picking the bottom of the barrel. if you want to expand league you have to allow new teams to get some talent. if you are going to protect 8 players why expand the league? how much fun is it to get 10 new teams made up of scrubs? as far as fairness to old teams go, they had a 1 year head start to accumulate talent(which they did, or al-jeff would still be in minnesota, lebron would be in clevland, dirk in dallas etc.) + top 3 picks in the draft with 2.5 superstars in it, what more do they need? if i'm not mistaken being here from year one doesn't give you any additional rights over newcomers, so for the rights to have a year advantage and protect 6 players they have to pay with something. also, they knew there would be expansion draft, so they had plenty of chance to trade players they knew they couldn't keep, so it was all matter of strategy. i repeat, why expand the league if you're not going to give new gms any talent?
|
|
|
Post by Miege22 on Jun 8, 2008 14:32:37 GMT -5
Ajant, I undertand where you are coming from. At the same time, Rockndoc is right. Atlanta put together a great roster, as did Utah, and allowing all of their players to be drafted wouldn't exactly be right. Also, I tried to make this as realistic as I could, and when the Bobcats became a team the league did the same thing for their expansion draft. Only difference was that Charlotte had no one, where as the teams here had at least a few guys.
|
|
|
Post by Miege22 on Jun 8, 2008 14:36:38 GMT -5
And, as far as when the rules were edited, it was edited on the 4th because I realized the second rule had to be modified so every team could draft 4 times.
|
|
|
Post by ajant on Jun 8, 2008 14:44:57 GMT -5
Ajant, I undertand where you are coming from. At the same time, Rockndoc is right. Atlanta put together a great roster, as did Utah, and allowing all of their players to be drafted wouldn't exactly be right. Also, I tried to make this as realistic as I could, and when the Bobcats became a team the league did the same thing for their expansion draft. Only difference was that Charlotte had no one, where as the teams here had at least a few guys. bobcats had 2nd overall pick in nba draft. as i said i understand what this means for old teams in terms of losing some nice players, but as i said they had a year head start to collect players and then a right to protect 6 of them so i think they have enough protection. allowing them to protect 6 players was more then fair to them, allowing us to pick any unprotected player without restrictions is only fairness you can give us. once we are in the league we are all equal in terms of rights except for the mods who have extra duties. so is it fair to us to allow any further protection to them? you need to be fair to both groups, not just them. look what we hve available in the draft and tell me that you will rejected my plea because it is "unjust" to some gms more then it is "unjust" to us to make us go into season with scrubs. losing players through exp draft is painful but you are well rewarded for that pain with 6 keepers and top 3 picks in the draft. i repeat teams that didn't want to lose players could have traded them
|
|
|
Post by ajant on Jun 8, 2008 14:48:39 GMT -5
if you want to protect returning gms with 2 players per team rule, then abolish 6 protected players for returning teams or reduce it to 1. you can't have both rules in favor of one side and still call it fair to everyone
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Mouse on Jun 8, 2008 15:16:25 GMT -5
I tend to agree with ajant, not that it is going to matter. This is an expansion draft with 10(!) teams starting essentially from scratch and the best 3 players available were Rasheed Wallace, Tyrus Thomas, and Raymond Felton. Not exactly the kind of talent to build around. I understand a lot of teams would be upset if their rosters got blown up, but its not like you built these rosters through hard work and crafty GM-ing. Y'all had 10 unused rosters to pick apart at will last season.
The "no more than 2 from one team" rule exists in the NBA because at most there is two new teams picking and they could easily use their picks to completely dismantle a division rival.
In our situation, knocking a team down to just six players would barely even put us on level ground. If used my four expansion picks, coupled with the roster I took over at the start I would only have a total of 6 players all of whom are rejects from other teams and thus theoretically every player on my roster would be worse than every player on every "non-expansion" roster.
For that reason I wouldn't feel too sorry if Atlanta lost Wallace, Felton, AND Travis Outlaw. It might be a little hard to swallow, but the Hawks obivously have 6 better players already on their roster, and each of those guys are about to become the "franchise player" somewhere else.
I know it can't change at this point (although I guess it could), but you need to know the kind of disadvantage us expansion teams are at. Y'all stole our best players and are graciously giving us back the scrubs that didn't work out for you last year. Its a pretty raw deal.
|
|