geodbear wrote:I brought this up more to have a discussion. I doubt that a team starting 10 PF/C can actually win. A team would be able to dominate blk/rebs/fg% with a an edge in TOs, but would struggle at being strong enough in a 5th category. A team of 10 PG/SG probably has a better chance, but drafting even in an auction draft would be hard. You're looking to win 3s, asts, stls, ft%, and pts, giving up rebs, blks, fg%, and TOs. You would have to get two top scoring guards and two top assist point guards at least. So in an auction format, you may be looking at getting a trio like Westbrook, Paul, and DWill. And just fill the rest of your team. It'd be interesting see what type of experiment would work. But of course, no reflection to real life NBA.
Another format could be 3 G, 3 F, 1 C, 3 U for a starting 10. I think for building a successful fantasy team, the only positions you could tank are PG or PF/C. Probably not both. I don't think you could build a team just on wings. Maybe if you focus on winning pts, 3s, stls, ft%, and TOs.
It seems like a positional heavy team would have to go with a tank 4 cat strategy. I think even if I set up 10 utility positions, very few managers would actually draft a team so skewed towards a couple of positions, though who knows.
I disagree with this. In this draft I was forced to look at PG,SG, and SF who contributed in the cats I was targeting (IE those cats where more players contributed to) where-in had I been able to draft specific to 10 UTIL players I wouldn't have had to sacrifice some value for position eligibility. I would admit that this strategy probably only works in an Auction League, where I was able to target specific players at specific values.
A few hours before I had laid out my strategy in this league for the T4 and it consisted of tanking Assists, Points, Steals, and FT%. Notice that I did so without drafting Howard, who despite being fairly cheap in this auction, or Blake Griffin, Josh Smith, or Andrew Bynum. The only player I drafted who wasn't on my list was Bogut and the only player on my list who I wasn't able to draft was Mo Williams (who went for more than what I was interested in paying).
I do agree with geodbear in that I wouldn't field a team of straight Big Men though. I would probably have 2 or 3 other positional players, just for threes. Batum would have been the player more than likely that in a non-positional league I would have avoided and as a result would have gone after a Kevin Love or Ilyasova. Obviously if Channing Frye would have been healthy I would have jumped on him as well.
All this being said, I'm not in favor of having a no position league. Just takes the fun and strategy out of it. It's like playing checkers with chess pieces.