Rank Of Force, At the Quarter Pole

Still suffering from technical issues, so I'll keep this short.

Back in the day, when I was in corporate management, I did something called "A Rank of Force" that required me to make a list of all the people who worked for me and rank them, from "most indispensable" to "most easily lived without".  What this was for was multi-fold.  It was to create a "hit list" should there be a RIF or "Reduction In Foce", also known as a "layoff".  If I had to lay people off, who would I let go first?  Second?  Third, and all the way up to the employee that I would fight like Hell to keep because they were the most valuable person I had.  The second purpose of this list was to help me crystallize what positions/roles needed to be filled, what my depth at those positions were.  If I laid someone off because I had to, and things turned around, how easy/hard would it be for me to find their replacement?  Do they have skill sets/experience that are rare and how do those difficult-to-replace skills place them in my Rank-of-Force.  Maybe it moved them up over a better performer because there were lots of top performers in that other employee's position, so getting another one would be easy, but finding a replacement for that less-effective but more irreplaceable one made them more valuable to me.


We are 1/4 of the wqy through the season.  I thought it might be nice to see how everybody thought of our roster.  Take into account all the factors:  trade value, replaceability, depth chart and their place on it, our style of play and what kind of players would fit better into it.  Be Danny. Be the person that has to decide who is a keeper and who isn't. Obviously, this does not take into account things like "who would you trade them for?". Of course, if a marquis player was available you might be willing to trade your #1 most valuable player for them because, as valuable as they are now they are not as valuable as the incoming player. Danny, however, would try to spin the deal so his trading partner would take a less valuable player than that one, right? So, that's were the Rank of Force comes in. Who is a lesser player as compared to each other?

Which player, if you had to build a team around them, would be the first one you would keep?  Who is the first player who, if you could, you would trade them for another asset?  Rank our Boston Celtic force, 1-15., where #1 is who you think is the most valuable and #15 is the least.



bob


.

#1 - AB
#15 - James Young

Those two are easy.

As with many thing like my Sunday football picks I spend at least 5 minutes on this.

(And I got 5 games right yesterday too.)

Unfortunately Bob the wording in your last paragraph would seem to indicate you might want 2 lists.

"Which player, if you had to build a team around them, would be the first one you would keep? Who is the first player who, if you could, you would trade them for another asset? "

So I'm ignoring the second part and just using the first cause as you alluded too NO one on this team is safe if that "special player" becomes available.

1) Smart
2)Bradley
3) Crowder
4) Sully
5) Thomas
6) Johnson
7) Turner
KO
9) Mickey
10) Zeller
11) Hunter
12) Rozier
13) Jonas
14) Lee........mostly due to age
15) Young


beat

Beat, long run I'd keep Hunter over Zeller.

worcester wrote:Beat, long run I'd keep Hunter over Zeller.

Sort of looked at it (to a degree) like grade school and all the kids line up and get picked one at a time.

In this case I went with the "bigger" kid, also did this for the right now to, not the "long" term view, (cept for Lee)

Now if you asked me for to go with players to hang on to for 3-5 years i'd flip a few of them.

beat

my list, based on play so far this season and value longer term:

1. Smart
2. Bradley
3. Thomas
4. Crowder
5. Sullinger
6. Olynyk
7. Johnson
8. Turner
9. Zeller
10. Jerebko
11. Hunter
12. Rozier
13. Lee
14. Mickey
15. Young- good to see Young get some minutes last night, lets see if this is a trend before moving him up any