RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Rebkell Fantasy Basketball League
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 36, 37, 38 ... 41, 42, 43  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 20495



Back to top
PostPosted: 07/08/19 4:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

My second F option is sad. Langhorne has been terrible this season. Gustafson might be gone mid-week. I also have too many guards (5).

WEEK 8

Lellani Mitchell, G, PHOE
Jordan Canada, G, SEA
DeWanna Bonner, F, PHOE
Monique Billings, F, ATL
Tina Charles, C, NY



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
tbinta



Joined: 29 May 2013
Posts: 482
Location: Bay Area


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/08/19 5:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Week 8
G - Betnijah Laney, G, IND
G - Courtney Williams, G, CONN
F - Cheyenne Parker, F, CHI
F - Theresa Plaisance, FC, DALL
C - Sylvia Fowles, C, MIN



_________________
The Bay Is iN The Area
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 25850



Back to top
PostPosted: 07/08/19 6:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Yo Adam! Take a look see at your PMs Please.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
hoopmom



Joined: 11 May 2014
Posts: 57



Back to top
PostPosted: 07/08/19 8:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Hoopmom:
G odyssey sims
G chelsea gray
F Natasha Howard
F Candace Dupree
C Maria Valdeva if back else Marie guilich


NYSports56



Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 733
Location: New Jersey, USA


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/08/19 8:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

NYSports56 lineup for week 8

G - Erica Wheeler, IND
G - Tiffany Hayes, ATL
F - Napheesa Collier, MIN
F - A'ja Wilson, LV
C - Natalie Achonwa, IND


Mojo



Joined: 10 May 2017
Posts: 233
Location: Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/08/19 9:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Mojo/myrtle wish to announce a trade with adamj95. 
Mojo/myrtle: R Williams, guard, LAS 
Traded for 
adamj95: J Lavender, f/c, Chi 
(Adam, you will need to confirm the trade with this post for it to be valid)


WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 8887
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/08/19 9:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Slooty
Cloud
Thomas
Glory
Zauhi



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 53005



Back to top
PostPosted: 07/08/19 10:36 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Mojo wrote:
Mojo/myrtle wish to announce a trade with adamj95. 
Mojo/myrtle: R Williams, guard, LAS 
Traded for 
adamj95: J Lavender, f/c, Chi 
(Adam, you will need to confirm the trade with this post for it to be valid)


Adam, don’t be a sucker. The league is looking to suspend Williams.
https://www.swishappeal.com/platform/amp/wnba/2019/7/8/20686248/wnba-riquna-williams-criminal-charges-suspension



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 25850



Back to top
PostPosted: 07/09/19 12:51 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

everybody knows they've been considering it...since late May. Meantime she goes on putting up pretty decent numbers. Will they actually do it before her trial in six weeks? Who knows? There's always a risk to be had. Meantime he's not playing Lavender so it's a benefit to him. What's it to you anyway?



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
Admiral_Needa



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 9918
Location: Tiburon, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/09/19 5:50 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

    Week 8-
    G- Kayla McBride, Las Vegas
    G- Kia Nurse, New York
    F- Candace Parker, Los Angeles
    F- Jonquel Jones, Connecticut
    C- Teaira McCowan, Indiana



_________________
2002 WNBA Virtual GM Overall Winner
2006 WNBA Triple Threat Overall Winner
2007 NBA ESPN Fast Break Overall Winner
NYSports56



Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 733
Location: New Jersey, USA


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/09/19 6:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Just a reminder that the Trade Deadline is this Monday, July 15, at 6 PM EDT (GMT - 4).


adamj95



Joined: 09 May 2014
Posts: 1767
Location: East Grand Forks, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/09/19 11:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

i confirm the trade. Very Happy



_________________
4 time WNBA Champion, 3rd all time in Assists, Minnesota's own: LINDSAY WHALEN.
Mojo



Joined: 10 May 2017
Posts: 233
Location: Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 12:23 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

adamj95 wrote:
i confirm the trade. Very Happy


NYSports. Is this sufficient reply for the trade to be valid?


NYSports56



Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 733
Location: New Jersey, USA


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 1:26 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Mojo wrote:
adamj95 wrote:
i confirm the trade. Very Happy


NYSports. Is this sufficient reply for the trade to be valid?


Yes, it is. Although I wonder why he didn't verify it before Williams played tonight. She scored a fraction over 20, a point over her season average, by the way. Maybe he wanted to wait and see how well she played before he confirmed the trade? Or maybe he wanted to see if someone would offer him something better before he confirmed.

I am not accusing Adam of anything at all. I'm not even sure that it would be underhanded for him to even do those things. One of the reasons I even thought about it was because I thought it would be advantageous to my team to make one of those better offers. After seeing the trade announced and then not confirmed, I thought about offering a guard that averaged 4 points a game more than Williams to Adam for Lavender (which shows you what I think of this trade), but I didn't want to open Pandora's Box before we talked about it.

So now the trade has been completed and we can talk about it. What should be allowed and not allowed in between the time the first person announces the trade and the second person confirms it? Should I have just gone ahead and made my offer? Is it OK that Adam waited for Riquna to play before he agreed to the trade? What could we do to stop those things if they're not OK? Is there a better way to announce and finalize trades?

Interested in everyone's perspective on this.


Mojo



Joined: 10 May 2017
Posts: 233
Location: Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 10:11 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

NYSports56 wrote:
Mojo wrote:
adamj95 wrote:
i confirm the trade. Very Happy


NYSports. Is this sufficient reply for the trade to be valid?


Yes, it is. Although I wonder why he didn't verify it before Williams played tonight. She scored a fraction over 20, a point over her season average, by the way. Maybe he wanted to wait and see how well she played before he confirmed the trade? Or maybe he wanted to see if someone would offer him something better before he confirmed.

I am not accusing Adam of anything at all. I'm not even sure that it would be underhanded for him to even do those things. One of the reasons I even thought about it was because I thought it would be advantageous to my team to make one of those better offers. After seeing the trade announced and then not confirmed, I thought about offering a guard that averaged 4 points a game more than Williams to Adam for Lavender (which shows you what I think of this trade), but I didn't want to open Pandora's Box before we talked about it.

So now the trade has been completed and we can talk about it. What should be allowed and not allowed in between the time the first person announces the trade and the second person confirms it? Should I have just gone ahead and made my offer? Is it OK that Adam waited for Riquna to play before he agreed to the trade? What could we do to stop those things if they're not OK? Is there a better way to announce and finalize trades?

Interested in everyone's perspective on this.


Good points made. As you say, once a trade is announced, some other team could try to make a better deal or make swaying comments in their own interest. It could happen to any of us. Right now it is a matter of courtesy to wait for the deal to complete. If you're looking for a rule to prevent trade tampering, I can't think of a simple one, but I will suggest allowing a copy/paste from the confirmation PM as being a method to use for a simultaneous trade/confirmation announcement. Would this work? That way I could have made the offer through PM, waited for the PM reply, then publicly posted the trade details with confirmation PM attached. This might work if done using the "quote" where both specific offer and reply confirmation are coupled together. I'm not sure if this is a good idea.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 25850



Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 10:18 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I see your point. To me, it would likely be within the rules, but it wouldn't be very ethical to offer something 'better' once a trade is announced, unless the person not yet confirming actually says 'no, I changed my mind' since essentially a handshake deal has already been made. Because not everyone spends 'all' their time on rebbies, it's not unusual for there to be lag time between the deal announcements. I think if someone wants to open up and take offers, they could simply come to the thread and say "hey, I'm looking to trade a g for an f and I'm thinking to offer J.Blabbermouth. Any offers?" Really the only way a trade works, is for it to be 'good' for both sides. In our case, we just want a solid backup F/C and are hoping to not have to play her while Adam had a plethora of them, so couldn't play them all anyway and his guard production has been iffy.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
Mojo



Joined: 10 May 2017
Posts: 233
Location: Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 10:33 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Mojo wrote:
NYSports56 wrote:
Mojo wrote:
adamj95 wrote:
i confirm the trade. Very Happy


NYSports. Is this sufficient reply for the trade to be valid?


Yes, it is. Although I wonder why he didn't verify it before Williams played tonight. She scored a fraction over 20, a point over her season average, by the way. Maybe he wanted to wait and see how well she played before he confirmed the trade? Or maybe he wanted to see if someone would offer him something better before he confirmed.

I am not accusing Adam of anything at all. I'm not even sure that it would be underhanded for him to even do those things. One of the reasons I even thought about it was because I thought it would be advantageous to my team to make one of those better offers. After seeing the trade announced and then not confirmed, I thought about offering a guard that averaged 4 points a game more than Williams to Adam for Lavender (which shows you what I think of this trade), but I didn't want to open Pandora's Box before we talked about it.

So now the trade has been completed and we can talk about it. What should be allowed and not allowed in between the time the first person announces the trade and the second person confirms it? Should I have just gone ahead and made my offer? Is it OK that Adam waited for Riquna to play before he agreed to the trade? What could we do to stop those things if they're not OK? Is there a better way to announce and finalize trades?

Interested in everyone's perspective on this.


Good points made. As you say, once a trade is announced, some other team could try to make a better deal or make swaying comments in their own interest. It could happen to any of us. Right now it is a matter of courtesy to wait for the deal to complete. If you're looking for a rule to prevent trade tampering, I can't think of a simple one, but I will suggest allowing a copy/paste from the confirmation PM as being a method to use for a simultaneous trade/confirmation announcement. Would this work? That way I could have made the offer through PM, waited for the PM reply, then publicly posted the trade details with confirmation PM attached. This might work if done using the "quote" where both specific offer and reply confirmation are coupled together. I'm not sure if this is a good idea.


There are all sorts of ways a trade can go sour. With a trade deadline coming up, time becomes a factor. One scenario is: What if adam had waited longer to confirm and NYSports is waiting as a courtesy, or if I had a plan b of offering to trade with another team? If actions are made in haste, then ethics/courtesy come into play. So I revert back to the PM suggestion as a solution.
On the other hand, if I were to offer a player to trade as a public post, then I would think getting into a bidding war is ok. In fact didn't someone make a public post about needing a particular position player?


Mojo



Joined: 10 May 2017
Posts: 233
Location: Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 1:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

NYSports. You recently made a swift decision regarding the suspended game. I appreciate you trying to find a rule that fit the situation. Maybe a "suspended game" clause for next year might be appropriate. You made the best of a no win situation.
Waiting until this recent trade was confirmed before addressing the loophole of others being able to see a trade in progress but not yet confirmed, and that others could make a different trade offer, this shows your concern of how to make trades without it turning into a cutthroat chaotic situation.
In both cases you have been open to suggestions, and that type of interaction will lead toward having solid rules in place for future unexpected situations.


NYSports56



Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 733
Location: New Jersey, USA


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 2:18 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
Really the only way a trade works, is for it to be 'good' for both sides. In our case, we just want a solid backup F/C and are hoping to not have to play her while Adam had a plethora of them, so couldn't play them all anyway and his guard production has been iffy.


His guard production has been iffy because he has Elena Delle Donne playing forward when she should be at guard. Dearica Hamby (23.4 PPG) and Lavender (20.7 PPG) could both play forward in her place (well, Lavender can't any more).

I'm going to use points per game for analysis here. It's not the final word on anything, but at least I can present my points in an objective fashion.

By moving Delle Donne to guard in place of Lexie Brown (13.5 PPG) and putting Hamby at forward, Adam would gain 9.9 PPG. At the other guard, Adam could play Jackie Young(9.0 PPG) before the trade, but now, Adam can play Riquna Williams, who averages 9.1 PPG. That's a net gain of 0.1 point with the lineup that has the best average PPG total.

One the other hand, by trading their 4th guard, Mojo and Myrtle risk nothing unless they have two injuries to their top three guards. And even then, with Tiera Ruffin-Pratt at 17.0 points a game, it's not that much of a problem. Since Skylar Diggins-Smith's return seems imminent (according to the Dallas broadcasting team), it might not even hurt at all. The bottom line is, if Diggins-Smith returns, Mojo/myrtle did not sacrifice anything. And if she doesn't the only risk is losing 2.1 points per game in the event of those 2 injuries.

For that, Mojo/myrtle get to fix the gaping hole on their team of having no backup center. An single injury to Britanny Griner would ruin the team right now. She averages 37.5 PPG. The best replacement on waivers is Alaina Coates at 6.6 points a game. Before the trade, and injury to Griner would cost Mojo/myrtle 30.9 points a game. Now, an injury will only cost them 17.2 points a game. So the bottom line is, without a Griner injury, no change with the trade. With a Griner injury, Mojo/myrtle gain 13.7 PPG with the trade.

That's a huge insurance policy to give the first place team for an average net gain of 0.1 point a game. Especially since the trade weakens Adam's depth at forward and center.

This trade lets Mojo/myrtle get away with the gamble of hoarding two injured superstars: Diggins-Smith and Angel McCoughtry. To do so, they had to go with no backup center. The upside of hoarding these players is clear, and seems like the upside may be realized if Diggins-Smith is coming back. The downside is that you put yourself in a position of vulnerability by having a short roster. Mojo/myrtle chose to go without a backup center. If the rest of the league doesn't exact a price when they try to fix it, their gamble had no downside.

Is there anyone who would like to make the argument that, in general, a guard is worth more than a forward-center who is averaging more than a point a game more? The most valuable position in our league is forward/center. Having a bunch of them is a position of strength. Mojo/myrtle were in a position of weakness, and somehow managed to come out with the better overall player.

You can't make the best team better without forcing them to sacrifice something, especially when they are desperate. This isn't even an issue in the leagues I'm involved in, because everyone pretty much knows this.

Everyone else's chances of winning this league just dropped because of this trade. Including Adam's. It's similar to offering someone a one-year $1 million life insurance policy for a penny a month. The majority of the time you will make 12 cents off the deal. That doesn't make it a good deal. Even ignoring whether Griner gets hurt or not, the trade only helps Adam in the instance that Riquna averages more points per game than his other 3 guards AND none of his forwards or centers gets hurt.

This is not as big a deal as I'm making it seem--it's a 1 for 1 trade and the players traded are not superstars. But to have the first place team even slightly fleece a team that is currently out of the playoff picture sets off alarms with me. I wasn't going to say anything, but with Myrtle's explaining to everyone that a trade needs to help both teams, I felt the need to share my perspective on the deal. I feel there is a significant disparity in the amount each team has been helped.


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 53005



Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 3:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

That's why you have voting on a trade. A losing team can help out a winning team, intentionally or otherwise. Or else just do away with trades altogether.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 25850



Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 4:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I think you have to consider recent production - since R. Williams has been put into the starting lineup she has been averaging significantly more than previously and has been consistent. He will gain much more than your .1 points/game. We actually didn't want to give her up but needed to fill that backup role and at this point seemed like it would give best value to get best value. Calling it 'fleecing' actually pisses me off. You can say you don't like it but would it be 'fleecing' if we were in 5th place rather than a rather precarious - certainly not secure - 1st? It looked like the perfect match where we needed a backup C and he needed a more productive guard. Yes we took a gamble with Angel and Skylar and still don't know how effective either will be when/if they come back. We also somehow survived having Meesseman gone for a month. I think we drafted well (actually drafting first is certainly not my favorite position because you have to wait so long to get your second player) and got a bit lucky in lack of injuries and by other players doing well when a 'teammate' struggled...so far.

And basically I find it pretty offensive to try to tell someone else how to play their team. Are you now going to offer up analysis to everybody else on how they should be playing? [/rant]



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
NYSports56



Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 733
Location: New Jersey, USA


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 4:55 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Shades wrote:
That's why you have voting on a trade. A losing team can help out a winning team, intentionally or otherwise. Or else just do away with trades altogether.


I don't think this was intentional; I think the trade was done in good faith. And the team I think was favored didn't even get a starter in the deal. This is not something that should be subject to a veto. Despite the fact that I didn't like the trade, I doubt I would support a veto request. I also doubt that everyone else would support it. According to league rules, the rest of the league must be unanimous to veto a trade.

However, I did state that every team's probability of winning just went down (including Adam's). If true, it indicates that a veto request would not be completely unreasonable. Personally, if it turned out that more information came out about Riquna Williams as that recent article indicated it might, I would have called for a veto myself.

I don't think that Shades was out of line bringing up that recent article. Maybe the post shouldn't have read "Adam, don't be a sucker," but for the rest of the league who might want to veto the trade, I think it was appropriate. I've said before that I don't mind Shades giving opinions in public, because I feel it's better than in private. I also think that it's cool that non-league members are following the league and that some of them are participating in the discussion.

As for no-trade leagues, such a league would make me very happy; I have seen many a league ruined by one team getting too unbeatable. But usually, these trades are in semi-dynasty leagues, and their impact is longer reaching. When you can combine favorable trades from several years, things can really get out of hand.

Things can get out of hand in a redraft league, but usually that's when one team makes a whole bunch of trades, each one improving their team significantly, but not enough to cause a veto. One team making one trade for a backup isn't enough to ruin a league by a long stretch.

While a no-trade league would make me happy, I think the majority of people who play fantasy think that trades are a part of the fun, and wouldn't want that.

I do stand by my statement that everyone else's chances of winning just got worse. Not by a lot, because it only applies when Griner gets injured, but if she does, the PPG loss isn't nearly as much, and Mojo/myrtle will be harder to beat than without the trade.


NYSports56



Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 733
Location: New Jersey, USA


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 6:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
I think you have to consider recent production - since R. Williams has been put into the starting lineup she has been averaging significantly more than previously and has been consistent. He will gain much more than your .1 points/game. We actually didn't want to give her up but needed to fill that backup role and at this point seemed like it would give best value to get best value. Calling it 'fleecing' actually pisses me off. You can say you don't like it but would it be 'fleecing' if we were in 5th place rather than a rather precarious - certainly not secure - 1st? It looked like the perfect match where we needed a backup C and he needed a more productive guard. Yes we took a gamble with Angel and Skylar and still don't know how effective either will be when/if they come back. We also somehow survived having Meesseman gone for a month. I think we drafted well (actually drafting first is certainly not my favorite position because you have to wait so long to get your second player) and got a bit lucky in lack of injuries and by other players doing well when a 'teammate' struggled...so far.

And basically I find it pretty offensive to try to tell someone else how to play their team. Are you now going to offer up analysis to everybody else on how they should be playing? [/rant]


If they would like them to tell me what their best lineup is based on PPG, yes, I will look it up and tell them. I'd also like to point out that I waited until the trade was complete and it was too late for this week's lineup to change before I said anything.

When I saw the trade, my eyebrows raised and I thought I'd see if the numbers matched my intuition. I used PPG because it was the only way I felt I could do it without bias.

I did mention that the analysis was not thorough because if this. Because of your comments, I have looked at the game by game stats and see that Riquna Williams was coming off an good 3 game stretch where she averaged 26.8 PPG. But the three games before it, she only averaged 11.6 PPG. Three games before that, she had her best game of the year. She's been up and down. I don't expect the last three games of an up and down player to indicate a trend when the three games before that were so bad. Based on this, I do expect slightly better from Williams; the last 3 games of course count more than the 3 before that, but exactly how much? I guess we will all see.

If we are going to consider recent games, however, Dearica Hamby's minutes and production have fallen off in the past two games. I don't know the reason, but if this is something that makes Hamby a bad fantasy option in the future, then Adam's ideal lineup by PPG goes down because he doesn't have Lavender to start at forward any more--he will now have to play Delle Donne at forward. Also, if either Delle Donne, Latoya Sanders, or Chiney Ogwumike gets injured, Adam now has no one but Hamby to fill their shoes.

I apologize for using the word fleece, but as I said, I chafe a bit when the top team gets the better of a deal with a team that is not doing so well. When they follow it up by arguing that the trade helped both teams, and I don't agree, I feel the need to say something.

Perhaps I was too forceful with my comments, but my actual words were "slightly fleece." I also tried to temper my comments by saying that it really wasn't a big deal. I also said in my next post that I thought the trade was done in good faith. I am genuinely sorry that this pissed you off. But, specific team needs aside, I think it is fair to refer to trading a F-C with a higher PPG for a G as a slight fleece regardless of the position of the teams making it. The value of the two positions is not equal.


NYSports56



Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 733
Location: New Jersey, USA


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 6:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

OK, enough for me with this back and forth about something that is over and done. Apologies to everyone who found the exchange unpleasant.

On to the issue that this trade revealed. For the reasons mentioned several posts before, I think the current trade rules are too easy to be exploited.

Mojo's suggestion of a cut and paste of the trade agreement is on the right track, but a cut and paste can be forged.

The solution I think is to have the person who reports the trade keep a record of the other person agreeing to the trade in their inbox. No cut and paste is needed; just keep the message in your inbox until the trade is ratified.

The trade will go into effect immediately. The confirmation is only a formality, unless the person who reports the trade is actually lying about the trade. In that instance, the other person instead of confirming, can state that the trade announcement was fraudulent.

If so, I think a screenshot would suffice to prove things, unless it is possible to alter messages in your in-box. Because of this, I am fairly sure we won't ever have a problem, because anyone who lies about a trade (either as announcer or confirmer) will be permanently banned from the league, no questions asked. I doubt anyone's going to lie if they know they're going to get caught.

The only gray area I can think of is someone accidentally reporting incorrectly. Perhaps the original deal was player X for player Y, but was changed to X for Z, and the reporter had player Y's name still stuck in his mind when the announcement was typed. I'm not going to consider that fraudulent. If there was indeed a trade agreed, when confirming, the error should be pointed out. If everyone is in agreement, the trade will be corrected. If there is still disagreement, then the inbox will be checked and someone will be ousted from the league.

Are there other gray areas? Is this a satisfactory solution?


Mojo



Joined: 10 May 2017
Posts: 233
Location: Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/10/19 7:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

NYSports56 wrote:
myrtle wrote:
Really the only way a trade works, is for it to be 'good' for both sides. In our case, we just want a solid backup F/C and are hoping to not have to play her while Adam had a plethora of them, so couldn't play them all anyway and his guard production has been iffy.


His guard production has been iffy because he has Elena Delle Donne playing forward when she should be at guard. Dearica Hamby (23.4 PPG) and Lavender (20.7 PPG) could both play forward in her place (well, Lavender can't any more).

I'm going to use points per game for analysis here. It's not the final word on anything, but at least I can present my points in an objective fashion.

By moving Delle Donne to guard in place of Lexie Brown (13.5 PPG) and putting Hamby at forward, Adam would gain 9.9 PPG. At the other guard, Adam could play Jackie Young(9.0 PPG) before the trade, but now, Adam can play Riquna Williams, who averages 9.1 PPG. That's a net gain of 0.1 point with the lineup that has the best average PPG total.

One the other hand, by trading their 4th guard, Mojo and Myrtle risk nothing unless they have two injuries to their top three guards. And even then, with Tiera Ruffin-Pratt at 17.0 points a game, it's not that much of a problem. Since Skylar Diggins-Smith's return seems imminent (according to the Dallas broadcasting team), it might not even hurt at all. The bottom line is, if Diggins-Smith returns, Mojo/myrtle did not sacrifice anything. And if she doesn't the only risk is losing 2.1 points per game in the event of those 2 injuries.

For that, Mojo/myrtle get to fix the gaping hole on their team of having no backup center. An single injury to Britanny Griner would ruin the team right now. She averages 37.5 PPG. The best replacement on waivers is Alaina Coates at 6.6 points a game. Before the trade, and injury to Griner would cost Mojo/myrtle 30.9 points a game. Now, an injury will only cost them 17.2 points a game. So the bottom line is, without a Griner injury, no change with the trade. With a Griner injury, Mojo/myrtle gain 13.7 PPG with the trade.

That's a huge insurance policy to give the first place team for an average net gain of 0.1 point a game. Especially since the trade weakens Adam's depth at forward and center.

This trade lets Mojo/myrtle get away with the gamble of hoarding two injured superstars: Diggins-Smith and Angel McCoughtry. To do so, they had to go with no backup center. The upside of hoarding these players is clear, and seems like the upside may be realized if Diggins-Smith is coming back. The downside is that you put yourself in a position of vulnerability by having a short roster. Mojo/myrtle chose to go without a backup center. If the rest of the league doesn't exact a price when they try to fix it, their gamble had no downside.

Is there anyone who would like to make the argument that, in general, a guard is worth more than a forward-center who is averaging more than a point a game more? The most valuable position in our league is forward/center. Having a bunch of them is a position of strength. Mojo/myrtle were in a position of weakness, and somehow managed to come out with the better overall player.

You can't make the best team better without forcing them to sacrifice something, especially when they are desperate. This isn't even an issue in the leagues I'm involved in, because everyone pretty much knows this.

Everyone else's chances of winning this league just dropped because of this trade. Including Adam's. It's similar to offering someone a one-year $1 million life insurance policy for a penny a month. The majority of the time you will make 12 cents off the deal. That doesn't make it a good deal. Even ignoring whether Griner gets hurt or not, the trade only helps Adam in the instance that Riquna averages more points per game than his other 3 guards AND none of his forwards or centers gets hurt.

This is not as big a deal as I'm making it seem--it's a 1 for 1 trade and the players traded are not superstars. But to have the first place team even slightly fleece a team that is currently out of the playoff picture sets off alarms with me. I wasn't going to say anything, but with Myrtle's explaining to everyone that a trade needs to help both teams, I felt the need to share my perspective on the deal. I feel there is a significant disparity in the amount each team has been helped.


You're assessment of the value of Raquna is off, and you were not objective. She was not our fourth guard. TRP was fourth. Here are the stats to back it up. Raquna did not have the productiveness to be picked up by anyone until we did on 6-17. Before that her stats were not great (lowering her ytd stats), but beginning to show promise. Here are Raquna's stats since we picked her up on 6-17. On 6-18 both TRP and Raquna had bad games, 5 pts for Raquna, 1.4pts for TRP. Since then, through current... TRP scored 13.4 pts, 14.2 pts, 14.9 pts, 11.2 pts, 17.7 pts and 3.2 pts for an average of 12.4 pts over the last 6 games. Raquna scored 18.1pts, 27.1 pts, 28.1 pts, 26.0 pts, 11.7 pts, and 18.1 pts for an average of 22.1 pts over the last 6 games. Over the last 4 games Raquna is averaging 25.7 pts.
Over the last four games our starters, JThomas at 27.7 ppg and Quigley at 23.2 ppg. So who are you to tell me Raquna is our fourth guard? Currently, last four games, she was our #2 guard. I wonder how she ranks against all other guards over the last 4 or 6 games?
Your antagonistic approach is offensive to call it fleecing when we traded a starter-level guard for a quality f/c that fortified our roster depth, who adam did not play, and now he has a guard who has great stats, and we have Lavender, who we may never play. Why is it relevant to mention Skylar and Angel as hoarding when all teams had a chance to draft them? Both have not played, leaving a thin bench. Give me an exact return date of Angel and Skylar and how well they will be playing after returning... Who are you to tell other teams who they should be starting? Are you going to tell the other teams who to start?
Our team now has depth at both center and forward, yet we did give up something, even though your post says we didn't. We gave up a guard who is averaging enough points the last several games to be our #2 guard.
And then we get into the "if" scenarios of your post. If Griner goes down we now have a backup who is better than picking up BA center. Obviously why we went the trade route. You saying we sacrifice nothing is inaccurate. We sacrificed a guard who has enough stats over the last 4 to 6 games to give adam as much immediate gain as the Lavender gain over Coates senario, that is, if we ever play Lavender. In this senario, adam gets Raqua 25.7 ppg last 4 games in comparison to LBrown averaging 10.1 over the last 4 games. Adam's other starter, January, comes in at 16.9 last 4. Do you value the last several games as having importance for determining who to start?
And so I ask, is it allowable for a team that is currently doing well to try and improve their team via trade? If you look at most recent stats you will find Raquana's stats improve Adam's starting lineup and in exchange we fortified a weak bench, a tradeoff of needs


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 36, 37, 38 ... 41, 42, 43  Next
Page 37 of 43

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin