2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

[ksuttonjr76]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

Raise your hand if you would put Steph Curry at the position that was previously known as "center". Anyone? Any takers?

[TeamBuilder]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

Dude...that's a programming problem or limitation. This is not a valid reason for "positionless" basketball. You're literally asking the developers to create a program that makes human decisions and have "opinions" about players.

No. You're wrong. It has nothing to do with "opinions." Read the post again, because you clearly didn't the first time. I literally wrote this exact sentence:

"A positionless system that prioritizes player attributes and complimentary skills would be much better, and would allow A.I./CPU teams to determine lineups based on team play style and player attributes that are valuable to mix into a lineup."

You can't create a made-up claim that I want a program for "opinions" when I explicitly stated attributes and complimentary skills. Check mate.

[howardphillips214]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

Raise your hand if you would put Steph Curry at the position that was previously known as "center". Anyone? Any takers?

Sure.. If i wanted to never ever grab a rebound and get him injured in 30 seconds, why not?

Obviously that's a bit extreme, bro. But what I'm mostly talking about is the fact that we're constantly putting PGs at the 1 in Rec when their sole focus is to score. If i see someone with a Pass-First Guard but they're at the 2, why not let them get the 1? 2k is already doing most of their PUG match making with SF at the 4 so why the hell not? It's just frustrating when the SF can't shoot, I'm not a great shooter, and they slap another non-shooting C in there just because I'm a PF. Only reason i made a PF instead of a C is because they kill your ratings at the same height just because you're the 5. Whenever I'm the 5 in Rec i actually do way better. If im playing the 4 with a 5 that can shoot, that's fine. But i had a C the other day get on the Mic being like "BRO YOU SEE ME DOWN HERE EVERY PLAY, WHY NOT FEED ME?"

I was like... "Bro everyone else trying to eat too. But NOBODY should be able to score in the paint because YOU'RE always in the paint? Plus, if you DO step out your man never leaves the print?"

I just think it's time to say, ok we got a big and another forward DONE.

[ksuttonjr76]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

No. You're wrong. It has nothing to do with "opinions." Read the post again, because you clearly didn't the first time. I literally wrote this exact sentence:



"A positionless system that prioritizes player attributes and complimentary skills would be much better, and would allow A.I./CPU teams to determine lineups based on team play style and player attributes that are valuable to mix into a lineup."



You can't create a made-up claim that I want a program for "opinions" when I explicitly stated attributes and complimentary skills. Check mate.

And you clearly don't understand computer and AI. You STILL have to assign some type of numerical value that the software understands. Computers don't run on common sense. Computers run on specific codes of programming to determine outcome with a sprinkle of RNG.

You take out positions then you create a situation where the AI determines that team A needs more three-point shooting based on percentages, and "logically" trades for Steph Curry. Without positions, Steph Curry could end up being your starting PF/C.

Real talk. Positionless basketball don't exist in the same manner that positionless jobs don't exist. There are "defined" roles and those defined roles are carried out by a defined title. If you initiate the offense and control the pace, you a damn point guard. You're not some random player on the court.

[ksuttonjr76]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

Sure.. If i wanted to never ever grab a rebound and get him injured in 30 seconds, why not?

Obviously that's a bit extreme, bro. But what I'm mostly talking about is the fact that we're constantly putting PGs at the 1 in Rec when their sole focus is to score. If i see someone with a Pass-First Guard but they're at the 2, why not let them get the 1? 2k is already doing most of their PUG match making with SF at the 4 so why the hell not? It's just frustrating when the SF can't shoot, I'm not a great shooter, and they slap another non-shooting C in there just because I'm a PF. Only reason i made a PF instead of a C is because they kill your ratings at the same height just because you're the 5. Whenever I'm the 5 in Rec i actually do way better. If im playing the 4 with a 5 that can shoot, that's fine. But i had a C the other day get on the Mic being like "BRO YOU SEE ME DOWN HERE EVERY PLAY, WHY NOT FEED ME?"

I was like... "Bro everyone else trying to eat too. But NOBODY should be able to score in the paint because YOU'RE always in the paint? Plus, if you DO step out your man never leaves the print?"

I just think it's time to say, ok we got a big and another forward DONE.

That's kinda a matchmaking problem. I only say kinda, because does it really "hurt" the team to have the pass-first player at the 2? If the team recognizes that he's the better PG (which is a position), then where matchmaking originally slotted them at is irrelevant. If you end up getting a SF that can't shoot, then it's on the team to figure out what the SF player can do to help the team. I'm confused with your reasoning behind not giving the big the ball. If he's capable of putting in work in the paint, then why would you NOT want to give him the ball? Pass him the ball and get out of his way. If the double comes, then the perimeter players should be ready to receive a pass from the post (presuming he passes). You're putting too much value on "shooting" versus what the team can do to win.

[TeamBuilder]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

You STILL have to assign some type of numerical value that the software understands.

Sigh. That's what attributes are... they are literal numerical values. I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

[howardphillips214]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

That's kinda a matchmaking problem. I only say kinda, because does it really "hurt" the team to have the pass-first player at the 2? If the team recognizes that he's the better PG (which is a position), then where matchmaking originally slotted them at is irrelevant. If you end up getting a SF that can't shoot, then it's on the team to figure out what the SF player can do to help the team. I'm confused with your reasoning behind not giving the big the ball. If he's capable of putting in work in the paint, then why would you NOT want to give him the ball? Pass him the ball and get out of his way. If the double comes, then the perimeter players should be ready to receive a pass from the post (presuming he passes). You're putting too much value on "shooting" versus what the team can do to win.

Point is... When a big camps in the paint all game he's hurting the team more than he's helping. This goes for ANYONE that's constantly clogging the paint, but moreso the big because their man is consistently down there to defend the rim. If im the 5 I'm constantly setting screens or spacing from midrange to keep my defender from camping. This is why teams in the NBA put such a premium on bigs who can space the floor. I'm not saying every big should be able to shoot, but coming out and setting screens for a shooter makes the big commit to helping on the shooter, then you and everyone else canyse driving lanes to score in the paint. Even if the bigs were camped on either of the low blocks this would help make the big man commit to a side. If im a post scorer, and im posted on the right block for instance. My man has to pressure me from the right side of the paint. Then if they kick it down, i cam kick to players cutting back door on the left baseline. But instead, they post up directly under the rim hoping someone passes or a shot comes off.

[Real2KInsider]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

Sigh. That's what attributes are... they are literal numerical values. I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

Yes, you should explain it in great detail if you're suggesting to tear down all code with no alternative. Especially since you're stanning for the Rockets who use players that break from those standard values.

Tell us about how you would implement this without breaking substitution patterns.

The Rockets don't play "positionless". They still follow a rotation w/ set player roles. All D'Antoni does is reclassify players and slide them up a primary position.

[ksuttonjr76]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

Sigh. That's what attributes are... they are literal numerical values. I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

What I come from "I shouldn't have to explain that to you" translate to "I really don't know what I'm talkin about, but I'm going to pretend like I know what I'm talkin about."

[Real2KInsider]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

I have a MyLeague where the A.I. 76ers signed Shaun Livingston and Derrick Favors. They started a lineup of Ben Simmons, Joel Embiid, Shaun Livingston, Derrick Favors, and Furkan Korkmaz against me in a MyLeague game... all because the stupid position system encourages them to get a PF (Favors) and think it makes sense to play him alongside Embiid, Simmons, and Livingston.

1. Player positions were updated across the league (i.e. Favors at C).
2. Favors has a high OVR so yeah why would he not start - this is working against your argument.
3. Livingston is a PG in the game so they literally played positionless as you suggested. You just hated the result.
4. The Sixers literally have a two center lineup IRL.

You can't seriously defend a system that stupid -- a system that simply constructs a lineup and roster based on listed positions without considering the attributes/skills/abilities of the players and how they fit together.

Problem: Not every team views these attributes/skills/abilities the same way. The Sixers (who run Simmons as a PG and not a PF despite his lack of shooting ability) are demonstrably one of those teams. If anything Livingston is exactly the player they would target if they don't value shooting in guards.

You're asking an AI to evaluate basketball like a human and not think in black & white, without having the roof cave in. Good luck with that.

I shouldn't even have to explain this to you.

You're not really explaining anything to me, so much as you keep repeating yourself ad nausea.

More specifically, look at Covington. He is playing great as a rim protector because it's not about his listed position and height, but rather his skills.

More specifically, look at P.J. Tucker. In what universe do his attributes scream "play this man at Center". You're just as likely to have Westbrook/Harden matching up with centers on defense.

Again, I shouldn't even have to explain this to you. Positions are shallowly categorical. That's it. Specific skillsets are much more important than listed positions. Positions are rigid and archaic. That's why you have teams foolishly play "stretch 5s" like Myers Leonard because he is a "center" when most of the time he is a waste of space. He doesn't rebound well, he doesn't defend the rim well, and he doesn't score well in the post. But teams look at him and say, "Oh gee, a 7'1" guy who can shoot the three, what an advantage to have a 'CENTER' who can stretch the floor." It's dumb. Just because he is tall he is stereotyped as a center. It's all nonsense. His skills simply aren't there. He is one dimensional.

The only thing "rigid and dumb" is ironically your stance on positionless basketball. Meyers Leonard is a poster-boy for what you are arguing for - he starts next to Bam Adebayo (another center) based PRECISELY on specific skills - shooting & rebounding. Yet you go out of your way to trash this player because he doesn't meet YOUR view for what skills his team values.

Lest we forget what multi-dimensional powerhouses P.J. Tucker, Danuel House, and Ben Mclemore are. You don't even know what you're arguing for. Please keep explaining it to me though.

[TeamBuilder]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

What I come from "I shouldn't have to explain that to you" translate to "I really don't know what I'm talkin about, but I'm going to pretend like I know what I'm talkin about."

I'm glad I don't come from the same place. Also, I did explain it to you...

[TeamBuilder]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

1. Player positions were updated across the league (i.e. Favors at C).
2. Favors has a high OVR so yeah why would he not start - this is working against your argument.
3. Livingston is a PG in the game so they literally played positionless as you suggested. You just hated the result.
4. The Sixers literally have a two center lineup IRL.

None of your list of 4 arguments are correct, relevant, or good points.

1. Irrelevant. He was listed as a PF in the MyLeague. A roster update doesn't change that in an already active MyLeague. I shouldn't have to explain this to you.
2. Weak argument. A high OVR doesn't automatically mean the player has to start. Lou Williams. Montrezl Harrell. Remember Manu? Remember OKC Harden? And a high OVR is in fact the reason why Livingston is foolishly starting alongside Simmons... his OVR is high enough that the 76ers decided to play him at one of his two listed positions (SG). I shouldn't have to explain this to you.
3. Livingston is listed as PG/SG. The 76ers started him at SG (a position he is literally listed at). It's NOT positionless basketball if he is playing a position he is listed at. I shouldn't have to explain this to you.
4. Al Horford spaces the floor. Derrick Favors does not. That's why the 76ers can play him alongside Embiid in what you call a "two center lineup." Horford has the skills to make him a serviceable fit alongside Embiid and Simmons. Favors does not. I shouldn't have to explain this to you.

Should I even bother reading the rest of your post after dismantling each of your first four nonsensical points?

[Real2KInsider]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

None of your list of 4 arguments are correct, relevant, or good points.

Great! When you list some good ones of your own, we'll be in business.

1. Irrelevant. He was listed as a PF in the MyLeague. A roster update doesn't change that in an already active MyLeague. I shouldn't have to explain this to you.

So the game is at fault because you use an outdated roster? Lol. Favors was listed at PF because he literally started next to Rudy Gobert. Explain that, lmao.

2. Weak argument. A high OVR doesn't automatically mean the player has to start. Lou Williams. Montrezl Harrell. Remember Manu? Remember OKC Harden?

Weak argument. The only reason those players don't start is because they have an AI control "Force Non-Starter" preventing them from doing so. Why? Because the AI literally can't distinguish whether they've overloaded on scoring or not. Every team has a unique situation.

And a high OVR is in fact the reason why Livingston is foolishly starting alongside Simmons... his OVR is high enough that the 76ers decided to play him at one of his two listed positions (SG). I shouldn't have to explain this to you.

Nah dude, you should try actually working on 2K rosters some time. Last year the game would start Zhaire Smith > J.J. Redick despite the lower OVR. It would also start T.J. McConnell and push Ben Simmons to the frontcourt. Why? Because the game already incorporates skill preference elements. This is literally a fraction of the roster chaos that would ensue if we took positions away.

But please, explain away your cockamamie theories that pretend what you're asking is remotely realistic to accomplish.

4. Al Horford spaces the floor. Derrick Favors does not. That's why the 76ers can play him alongside Embiid in what you call a "two center lineup." Horford has the skills to make him a serviceable fit alongside Embiid and Simmons. Favors does not. I shouldn't have to explain this to you.

Joel Embiid spaces the floor. Quite the conundrum!

Should I even bother reading the rest of your post after dismantling each of your first four nonsensical points?

sHoUlD i EvEn BoThEr ReAdInG

"Dismantling". Bruh. You're a coward. Time to log off and look in the mirror.

[Real2KInsider]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

Lets see what happens when we actually make players "positionless".

Listing all players at PG/NA (taking away positions) results in the following 2K generated lineups:

Sixers
PG: Josh Richardson
SG: Ben Simmons
SF: Matisse Thybulle
PF: Joel Embiid
C: Al Horford
Not starting: Tobias Harris

Lakers
PG: Rajon Rondo
SG: LeBron James
SF: Anthony Davis
PF: Kyle Kuzma
C: Dion Waiters
Not starting: Danny Green, Avery Bradley, JaVale McGee

Nuggets
PG: Monte Morris
SG: Jamal Murray
SF: Nikola Jokic
PF: Paul Millsap
C: Will Barton
Not starting: Gary Harris

Rockets
PG: Russell Westbrook
SG: James Harden
SF: Robert Covington
PF: P.J. Tucker
C: Austin Rivers
Not starting: Danuel House

Nets
PG: Kyrie Irving
SG: Kevin Durant
SF: Spencer Dinwiddie
PF: Caris LeVert
C: DeAndre Jordan

Knicks
PG: Elfrid Payton
SG: Frank Ntilikina
SF: Kadeem Allen
PF: Julius Randle
C: R.J. Barrett
Not starting: Mo Harkless, Taj Gibson

Mavericks
PG: Luka Doncic
SG: Jalen Brunson
SF: Seth Curry
PF: Tim Hardaway Jr
C: Kristaps Porzingis
Not starting: Dwight Powell, Dorian Finney-Smith

It was an interesting theory.

[tru11]

Re: 2K21 needs to be completely positionless.

Asking the game to solve a human related problem is silly.

Changing a label is not going to stop someone in doing what he wants to do.

Wether you label him a big , PF, C or whatever that PERSON is going to camp in the paint if he wants to do just that for whatever reason.

Its not a game job to fix a person basketball IQ.