Re: NBA 2K14 Video - Player Ratings
Chris Paul's defense is also better than Parker's.
See, Parker's loss of athleticism hurts his overall rating. That's simply how 2K's overall formula works. It favors athleticism, hence the Roses and Westbrooks getting their dues. Parker may be properly rated in his strengths and actually be a more effective player when used correctly with tendencies balanced to his strengths but the Overall is not going to reflect that.
Parker's rating is also hurt in 2K because he's a mediocre shooter when in real life he remains efficient because he relies on his elite penetration and doesn't take volume jumpers. I am guessing he'll play like himself and be much more formidable than say, Ellis who's rated similarly but you can probably force to take a bunch of inefficient long jumpers due to his poor tendencies (when playing the CPU). This also applies to Westbrook to some extent. Kyrie and Curry's ratings remain high because they're both very good shooters from all spots on the floor and that inflates their Overalls.
So again, quibbling over a couple points of Overall is pointless since Overall is arbitrary and doesn't account for signature skills, shot selection and poor tendencies. I'd look at the ratings of individual attributes compared to other PGs before blowing a gasket over a few points. Hopefully his offensive awareness is notably higher than similarly rated PGs and his Floor General and 4th Quarter sig skills probably make him more valuable as well.
In short, Overall is meaningless when comparing players even in ballpark of each other-- which is the case regarding Westbrook/Curry/Parker/Irving/Rondo. Even real life analysts have a hard time clearly ranking that group. Your favorite player may not actually have been shafted-- but the formula for the Overall rating could use improvement even though it doesn't do a single thing in making him play better.
Holiday and Ginobli though-- SMH.
Chris Paul's defense is also better than Parker's.
See, Parker's loss of athleticism hurts his overall rating. That's simply how 2K's overall formula works. It favors athleticism, hence the Roses and Westbrooks getting their dues. Parker may be properly rated in his strengths and actually be a more effective player when used correctly with tendencies balanced to his strengths but the Overall is not going to reflect that.
Parker's rating is also hurt in 2K because he's a mediocre shooter when in real life he remains efficient because he relies on his elite penetration and doesn't take volume jumpers. I am guessing he'll play like himself and be much more formidable than say, Ellis who's rated similarly but you can probably force to take a bunch of inefficient long jumpers due to his poor tendencies (when playing the CPU). This also applies to Westbrook to some extent. Kyrie and Curry's ratings remain high because they're both very good shooters from all spots on the floor and that inflates their Overalls.
So again, quibbling over a couple points of Overall is pointless since Overall is arbitrary and doesn't account for signature skills, shot selection and poor tendencies. I'd look at the ratings of individual attributes compared to other PGs before blowing a gasket over a few points. Hopefully his offensive awareness is notably higher than similarly rated PGs and his Floor General and 4th Quarter sig skills probably make him more valuable as well.
In short, Overall is meaningless when comparing players even in ballpark of each other-- which is the case regarding Westbrook/Curry/Parker/Irving/Rondo. Even real life analysts have a hard time clearly ranking that group. Your favorite player may not actually have been shafted-- but the formula for the Overall rating could use improvement even though it doesn't do a single thing in making him play better.
Holiday and Ginobli though-- SMH.
Some of these ratings that have been shown are definitely off.
Comment