Hyperbole in ratings...

[Comduklakis]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

On the surface it seems that way, but what I bet the simple answer is that the programmers just don't look at any results or ratings season 2,3,4,5...... They test out the rosters year one, it works out and they don't touch it again or look at what happens in any subsequent year.

I find that doubtful since one of the roster creators used to be an amazing roster creator on OS (Beds). Beds is and was well aware of the nature of progression and regression in later seasons.

[tril]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

yes and no. Yes a lower rated player can somtimes be a better performer than a higher rated player. And certainly a lower rated player can be a better fit. The issue, as stated earlier in the thread, is that 2k uses overall as the basis for cpu rotations, free agent signings, trade value, and contract value. As a results, underlying ratings such as "awareness" and "IQ" are often inflated to raise the overall ratings for 3 and D types and other role players and specialists. The truth of the matter is that a player like Anthony Tolliver should be about as pedestrian and uncreative a passer as there is. He should shoot the three, be a passable rebounder, and play decent D with a slightly above average block. Beyond that all passes should be the safest, most uncreative possible. He should rarely even dribble, much less make any fancy moves. Reality is, that doesn't happen. Players who are specialists are able to play like players who have more varied skills. The only way to solve this is somehow have 2k figure out how to better recognize specific skills and team needs in creating player rotations, signing free agents, and making trades. I'm not holding my breath because that seems to me, with ZERO game programming knowledge, infinitely complicated.

I think thats why they give us the control to veto trades and control all the teams in my league.
it would be a programming nightmare to pull this off. unless you have absolute values and a finite number of years.
they were able to program this type of logic in the college hoops series for the reasons you stated they cant do it in the NBA series.

IN CH2k8 there is
no salary cap
no trades
players lasted only 4 or 5 years. the turnover of players allowed teams to recruit the type of players they needed to fill a roster.

[wodi]

Hyperbole in ratings...

I just did a little testing with base rosters, no trades, everything automated. The results are below.

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1451688952.283724.jpg
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1451688961.722799.jpg

Celtics winning the championship year 1? With that roster? That will never happen, not even a Celtics fan can disagree with that.

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1451689082.149821.jpg
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1451689090.920690.jpg

Blazers win the championship year 2? Come on. Lillard and CJ are a great young pair, the they will not win the championship next year. Sorry.

This of course is not the end all be all and won't happen every time. But if you think LeBron and that Cavs team or the Warriors don't beat that celtics team in a 7 game series 100/100 times you don't know basketball.

[tril]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

^^
that is whats great about NBA 2k. every my league or association plays out differently in its own little universe.
slider adjustments, injuries, trades you make all effect the outcome of your NBA universe.
this keeps the game fresh.

[Real2KInsider]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

This of course is not the end all be all and won't happen every time. But if you think LeBron and that Cavs team or the Warriors don't beat that celtics team in a 7 game series 100/100 times you don't know basketball.

Were the Celtics a higher rated team than the Cavs or Warriors?

[/topic]

[wodi]

Hyperbole in ratings...

Nope, it's year one base rosters. Neither team had major injuries

[BA2929]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

I don't understand why Tim Duncan is still rated so high.

Probably because he's the greatest PF to ever play basketball. Some legacy points are probably at work. Like Kobe's 85 overall to start the season which infuriated many people (not me).

[janmagn]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

Probably because he's the greatest PF to ever play basketball. Some legacy points are probably at work. Like Kobe's 85 overall to start the season which infuriated many people (not me).

The difference is, that Duncan is still a very good player

Lähetetty minun LG-H440n laitteesta Tapatalkilla

[SonicMage]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

The difference is, that Duncan is still a very good player

Lähetetty minun LG-H440n laitteesta Tapatalkilla

Normally yes, but this year his numbers have been way down across the board. His job is to mentor Aldridge for the transition now.

[janmagn]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

Normally yes, but this year his numbers have been way down across the board. His job is to mentor Aldridge for the transition now.

Don't look straight to numbers. His role in offense is smaller, and he plays the best defense of his career.

Lähetetty minun LG-H440n laitteesta Tapatalkilla

[SonicMage]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

Don't look straight to numbers. His role in offense is smaller, and he plays the best defense of his career.

Lähetetty minun LG-H440n laitteesta Tapatalkilla

The numbers agree with you. But its a significant enough decline in rebounds and blocks, two categories that heavily factor into the overall formula for centers, to bring his overall rating down. Not saying its a big difference, but it would be a couple points lower.

[janmagn]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

The numbers agree with you. But its a significant enough decline in rebounds and blocks, two categories that heavily factor into the overall formula for centers, to bring his overall rating down. Not saying its a big difference, but it would be a couple points lower.

Blocks I give to you, a full 1% on block percentage is big for a center. But rebounding? 0,5 less rebounds per 36 minutes, 0,8 worse trb%. Don't seem too much of a decline. Those can come just with adding Aldridge.

Lähetetty minun LG-H440n laitteesta Tapatalkilla

[wodi]

Hyperbole in ratings...

It's the overall grouping of ratings rather than one specific guy being overrated though. You'll always have an argument someone is over or under rated, 2k will never be able to make it perfect. The issue is the overall scale being too bunched together initially, which causes problems when you take into account player progression year after year.

[Real2KInsider]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

Quick review, just a few tweaks I would make.

Tim Duncan (C/PF from PF/C)
83 Overall (-3) - Includes -1 from position change
OFFENSE
90 Standing Layup (-4)
60 Driving Layup (-3)
80 Post Fade (-3)
95 Post Hook
87 Post Control (-8)
65 Draw Foul (-8)
99 Standing Close (+3)
92 Moving Close
68 Standing Mid
60 Moving Mid (-8)
35 Standing 3pt
25 Moving 3pt
74 Free Throw (-4)
40 Ball Control
61 Pass Vision (-3)
71 Pass IQ
60 Pass Accuracy (+4)
68 Offensive Rebound (+1)
50 Standing Dunk (-10)
40 Driving Dunk (-9)
40 Contact Dunk
84 Shot IQ (-10)
95 Hands (-2)

DEFENSE
86 Defensive Rebound (-1)
76 Block (+1)
88 Shot Contest
65 Steal (+4)
85 On-Ball Defense (+2)
86 Low Post Defense (-3)
88 Reaction Time

ATHLETICISM
86 Boxout (-13)
38 Lateral Quickness
37 Speed
38 Acceleration
42 Vertical
67 Strength (+7)
74 Stamina
75 Hustle (-3)
90 Durability

INTANGIBLES
92 Pass Perception
99 Defensive Consistency (+9)
95 Pick & Roll Defense
90 Help Defense
75 Offensive Consistency
25 Emotion
99 Potential

SUMMARY
Duncan is operating mostly in the "Close" range. He isn't doing much from mid-range (that's Aldridge's department) and isn't attacking the rim much. He only has 1 dunk on the year which is a huge drop-off (42 last year). This is why his Usage has decreased but his shooting efficiency has not improved.

Defensively, he leads the league in DRPM (albeit in more limited minutes than your average starter). As with most players, spending less energy on offense usually leads to an uptick in defensive effort/energy. However his ratings here are already high simply because he was overrated to begin with (based on his level of defensive contribution in the years leading up to to this season), and therefore there isn't much to do beyond dock his offensive ratings.

[Real2KInsider]

Re: Hyperbole in ratings...

It's the overall grouping of ratings rather than one specific guy being overrated though. You'll always have an argument someone is over or under rated, 2k will never be able to make it perfect. The issue is the overall scale being too bunched together initially, which causes problems when you take into account player progression year after year.

The issue is draft classes don't follow 2K's rating scales and randomly generate. Multiple rookies will have mid-high 70s ratings when this has become an abnormality in recent years. Take for example, the 2014 Draft

81/SF Wiggins
76/SF Parker
76/C Embiid
74/PF Gordon
73/PG Exum
75/PG Smart
76/PF Randle
67/SG Stauskas
67/PF Vonleh
76/PG Payton
74/SF McDermott
76/PG LaVine
76/SF Warren
71/PF Payne
74/C Nurkic
66/SG Young
67/PG Ennis
73/SG Harris
65/SF Caboclo
73/C McGary
70/SG Adams
74/SG Hood
70/PG Napier
75/C Capela
69/SF Hairston
67/SG Wilcox
65/SF Huestis
71/SF Anderson

Only one player rates > 76 and can be considered a starting caliber player.
Two top 10 players already busted and are < 70 rating.

These are sophomore ratings so their rookie ratings were generally even lower than this. 2K generated draft classes don't replicate this, as players start too high and generally don't bust (receive worse ratings over time as it becomes clear the player sucks). If you want realism in your MyGM/Leagues you need to use custom draft classes which can control the variance..