Prev Page 1 of 1 Next

Turnovers as a Category Really "Grinds My Gears"!

You know what really "Grinds my Gears"? Turnovers as a category in rotisserie and head-to-head category leagues! It doesn't make sense as turnovers aren't equal to other categories, its penalizes the best players, and it rewards inactive owners. Let me break it down for you.

The fact a player turns the ball over should not be the equivalent to a player making a three pointer or a block. Turnovers are random as a pass can go through the players hands or get tipped and become a 50/50 ball. Having turnovers be the same as other categories is not skill, its luck, but most of it all, its dumb. 

The best players in the NBA turn the ball over the most. Why? Because they have the ball in their hands the most. Here are the top 10 players with the worst turnover rate per game in 2013-14(minimum 40 games played): Russell Westbrook (3.8), Stephen Curry (3.8), James Harden (3.6), John Wall (3.6), Kevin Durant (3.5),Michael Carter-Williams (3.5) DeMarcus Cousins (3.5), LeBron James (3.5), Eric Bledsoe (3.3), four tied with 3.2 (Monta Ellis, Dwight Howard, Ty Lawson, Victor Oladipo) . Half of those players are point guards and almost all of them are the best player on their team. Seven of the out the the top nine players on that list are first round picks. Turnovers only punishes the elite players, the players that have the ball the most. No one should not draft Kevin Durant because he has a lot of turnovers per game. That would be stupid, but it counts just as much as every other category. I have never heard someone say "draft player A over player B because he turns the ball over less than the other player". Don't get me wrong, turning the ball over is a negative thing, but it only hurts fantasy teams with elite players.

The biggest thing that "Grinds My Gears" about turnovers is that it rewards the inactive owner. You know, that owner that hasn't changed his lineup in months, half his players injured, is pretty much the Meg Griffin of the league, but guess what? That owner is first in turnovers or will win that category every week. There is no reason why a team should basically be rewarded for having injured or no players in the lineup. This greatly affects rotisserie leagues because it hurts the active owners. Also, the only way to cut down your turnovers is by not playing your best players! Let that sink in...

I do fully support turnovers in total point leagues. However, this year when you're joining a league that has turnovers as a category, simply ask the commissioner why they have turnovers equal to every other category? It is a hard question to answer and the only thing I can think of is because "Well, turnovers are a part of basketball". So is dunking, but that is not a category (I kind of like that idea though). The argument for turnovers is something Chris Griffin would argue for.There is zero reason to have turnovers as a category, because it is dumb and should not affect the outcome of fantasy leagues.

I cannot stress enough how stupid it is to have turnovers as category. I would strongly consider not joining a league if they had turnovers as category, because it punishes the team with the best players and that is the opposite of fun. Rant over! Feel free to holler at me on twitter @DaTrueGuru with any fantasy basketball related question. Also, be on the lookout for a Fantasy Alarm Draft Guide that will available in early October, and will be your key to having a successful fantasy basketball season.

Prev Page 1 of 1 Next