I’m going to write about fantasy basketball today for a few reasons:
1. – It’s fun to play and I don’t mind saying that I am dominating my league.
2. – The main source for this site is to serve as an outlet for me. I have more passionate Bulls fans in my life right now than I’ve had in the past. That change leads to my frustration over not being able to share my thoughts less frequently bubbling over into a blog post. However, I still don’t have any fantasy basketball friends or family members. Hence this post.
3. – I have a conundrum right now and I need your help.
Here’s what my roster looks like:
I can change my roster daily and don’t run out of eligible games. Therefore, one of the objectives is to never have a player with a game that night that I can’t fit anywhere on my active roster.
As you can see, I only have two players who qualify as SGs on my team currently. The Bucks’ Ramon Sessions is currently available and I want him, bad. He qualifies as a SG/PG, which makes him even more valuable since I could slide him in at several spots. He’s taken over for the injured Michael Redd, so he’ll finally be able to take the consistent production he’s provided all year and combine it with big, starter’s minutes.
I’m tempted, very tempted, to add him to my roster in place of Tyson Chandler. Chandler has been painfully inconsistent all year. On top of inconsistency, I drafted him far higher than I should have because I’ve been a fan since his Bulls days. That draft day mistake has kept me feeling bitter about him all season and looking for an excuse to get him off my team.
I’m further tempted by the fact that my league only has one position that is devoted solely to C. However, my roster features five players that qualify for that one spot. Logic would dictate dumping at least one of them, especially one that isn’t a C/PF, for an SG. See, PGs, SGs, SFs and PFs are more valuable that Cs because each can play in five different spots. If it’s a PG, he could play the PG, G, or any of the three UTILs. A C can only play four spots. I should lower my number of Cs, no?
The problem is that I drafted or acquired mostly outside shooting Cs, thinking that they add more. You get 3s, still get rebounds, often more points than back to the basket kind of guys. This strategy has helped me lead my league in points and assists, but has me sitting six out of ten in blocks, making that by far the weakest category I’m competing in. Now, can I afford to give up Tyson when I desperately need blocks?
I should mention that my league is head-to-head. The standings via category are mostly useful as a general idea of what I’m accomplishing week-to-week.
Here’s where I stand in each category:
FG% – 7 of 10 – I’ve simply conceded this category. Can’t win ‘em all.
FT% – 4 of 10
3PM – 3 of 10
Reb – 2 of 10
Ast – 1 of 10
Stl – 1 of 10
Blks – 6 of 10
Pts – 2 of 10
Like I said, I’m conceding FG% because I’ve been consistently bad enough at it that I won’t win there. My team is mostly guards and long-range shooters. Too late to change that and I’m not going win the percentages that way. Plus, I’m doing well enough in most other areas to get over it.
So do I go for Sessions, who I know would help me, but in categories in which I’m already ranked in the top three? Or stick with the frustrating Chandler and be forced to swallow some unecesary DNPs? On top of everything else, Chandler has been hurt lately and Sessions is one of the most added players in ESPN leagues in the recent past. Will Chandler come back stronger than before? Will someone else in my league jump on Sessions and make me regret my inaction for the rest of the season? These are the pains and joys of fantasy basketball.
Then there’s always Lamar Odom, another candidate primed for a great production increase with Bynum going out. I could lose him instead?
I think writing this has convinced me to sit tight for the moment, but boy, Sessions is tempting, especially considering I just found out Andrew Bogut is out for two months . . .