On ESPN.com's player profile pages they always put a little blurb under a player's stats for fantasy hoops guys, it's usually very vanilla and only talks about a player's last game and how that fits into the context of their overall season and what to expect going forward, however here's Batum's from today http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3416 I'm not sure what it says when fantasy geeks are calling out a coaches rotations. Mediocre Man would be proud
Its just cause Nik had bad timing...that shit is spot on. KS we just respond to your threads just to mock you even though you think you are the sly one Responses dont dictate "truthfulness"....see: you and Mixum (to a lesser degree)
Fantasy geeks have one big advantage over regular fans. To be successful as a fantasy geek, you have to learn to be ruthlessly objective about players. You have to screen out the white noise - and that includes whether you find a guy likable or not. You may "love" Steve Blake. You may want to have his baby. You still play Miller.
And the bottom line for "Fantasy Geeks" is always the stats. Bruce Bowen was never high on anyone's fantasy board, but every team in the NBA would have loved having him. "Fantasy Geeks" aren't objective though. If you have Andrew Bynum on your team, then you complain about how PJ and the Lakers don't use him right. If you have JR Smith you say that the Nuggets should get him the ball more. If J-Bay was on "Fantasy Guy's" roster, he'd say that it's a joke that Andre Miller still starts at PG. They don't take into consideration the nuances, like running an offense, or defense - it's ALL about the stats.
That may be true about Roto-style leagues, but not games like Strat-O-Matic. (ie simulation leagues where defense and strategy come into play) What fantasy geeks don't care about, is nebulous stuff like "personality", "character", "culture", or "potential." They are focused on productivity.
McMillan is an assclown, and fantasy geeks everywhere know it as well. It is simply mind boggling how many people still stand by this guy, and think he is a good head coach. AC is great at getting low end players, and depleated rosters to play their asses off, but he is a lousy in game coach who is aided by a top 10 player in the league and incredible offensive rebounding to make him look good.
First of all, Nik, I care. Secondly, there are a number of responses above that seem to try and lessen Nik's post because fantasy basketball differs from real basketball in many ways. Obviously, fantasy bball is all about statistics. But statistics matter quite a bit, or we wouldn't keep them. So, from a statistical standpoint, the stat geeks say give Batum more minutes. I think that's interesting, because I think the best arguments to give Batum more minutes don't show up in the box score. The point is - we are running out of reasons not to give this kid 30+ minutes a game. There is no way Dante should be playing more minutes than Nic like he did last night (and I really like Dante). I don't care what the matchup is. For Nic to only be averaging 22 minutes seems crazy to me.
What's funny though is that talk about his play at both ends of the floor, not just stuffing the boxscore with points.
I think you could say they are loosely related. Like an awful player will have bad team value and bad fantasy stats, and someone like Lebron and Kobe will have good fantasy stats.
