NBA 2K15 Player Rating - Andre Drummond (Overall 83)

[Boilerbuzz]

Davis is going to blow up this year. He is still a center even of he will play PF with Asik.

[eko718]

To say if this player is x, this player should be z doesn't even make sense, because the overall rating is not really even a rating at all, it is a visual composite of individual ratings. For me, as long as the individual rankings are accurate across the board, that is the important thing. The overalls can fall as they fall.

Overalls can look nice and tidy and in line with general expectation(though you can NEVER please everyone with this) but if you look under the hood and find stuff like Kyrie Irving(one of the worst on-ball defenders last year) having a 78 on the ball defense while Patrick Beverley(one of the best on-ball defenders last two years) has a 74 for on the ball D, then these are issues that ruin the game and cause a lack of realism.

Staying on Kyrie, I'm more concerned about his outrageously inaccurate 95 speed and 92 vertical ratings(2K14) than modifying it so that Lillard can be rated one point lower overall than he is, simply because someone thinks "Kyrie is better than Lillard" and attaches that expectation to the overall rating.

There have been for years so many ratings in 2K that were an absolute disorganized mess with no rhyme or reason and plenty of exaggeration. I'm glad that at least it appears that the game will be freshly rated this year, rating by rating, and hopefully according to a scale that weighs data more heavily than fandom. If they do that, I say let the 'overall' chips fall where they may.

[ojandpizza]

Here is the only problem I have with Drummond's rating of an 83.

It has be claimed that only 4 guys are rated in the 90's correct? We have LeBron and Durant for sure. I'm going to assume Chris Paul is a 3rd..

That leaves Dwight/Melo/Harden/Curry/Aldridge/Blake/Love/Westbrook/George/Davis/ and whoever else might possibly be able to crack the 90's..

Let's say a couple of those guys are 88's that means they only separate themselves from Drummond by 5 points. There is a MUCH larger gap than that between Drummond and the leagues elite stars. How much of a gap does that create between the other guys who aren't quite at that top level? Guys like Wall/Klay/Kyrie/Gasol/Jefferson/Cousins/DeRozan/Lillard/Wade/Bosh, etc.. Is there a chance Drummond is actually better than them, or even other guys he might not should be?

And I know we say "overall is just a number" and that's true to an extent.. If I'm just at home playing a quick game against the CPU or a friend then overall really means nothing.. But I've always been a franchise/dynasty/myGM guy.. That's pretty much all I play. And overall does play a factor. It determines who starts on the computer teams, how much trade value a player has, the types of touches the player gets, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[luda06]

Quote: Originally Posted by ojandpizza

There is a MUCH larger gap than that between Drummond and the leagues elite stars.

There isn't. Drummond is either top 10 or 15 in the league, based on a variety of player efficiency metrics, such as WS/48, PER, nERD, etc.

[ojandpizza]

Quote: Originally Posted by luda06

There isn't. Drummond is either top 10 or 15 in the league, based on a variety of player efficiency metrics, such as WS/48, PER, nERD, etc.

What's your point?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[luda06]

Quote: Originally Posted by ojandpizza

What's your point? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My point is your assessment is most likely incorrect.

[stillfeelme]

Quote: Originally Posted by eko718

To say if this player is x, this player should be z doesn't even make sense, because the overall rating is not really even a rating at all, it is a visual composite of individual ratings. For me, as long as the individual rankings are accurate across the board, that is the important thing. The overalls can fall as they fall. Overalls can look nice and tidy and in line with general expectation(though you can NEVER please everyone with this) but if you look under the hood and find stuff like Kyrie Irving(one of the worst on-ball defenders last year) having a 78 on the ball defense while Patrick Beverley(one of the best on-ball defenders last two years) has a 74 for on the ball D, then these are issues that ruin the game and cause a lack of realism. Staying on Kyrie, I'm more concerned about his outrageously inaccurate 95 speed and 92 vertical ratings(2K14) than modifying it so that Lillard can be rated one point lower overall than he is, simply because someone thinks "Kyrie is better than Lillard" and attaches that expectation to the overall rating. There have been for years so many ratings in 2K that were an absolute disorganized mess with no rhyme or reason and plenty of exaggeration. I'm glad that at least it appears that the game will be freshly rated this year, rating by rating, and hopefully according to a scale that weighs data more heavily than fandom. If they do that, I say let the 'overall' chips fall where they may.

Preach man couldn't have said it better myself. Let the stats fall where they may and just be consistent. I am very interested to see where Kyrie falls. He had a bad year shooting mid range and just average from three.

[Boilerbuzz]

Quote: Originally Posted by stillfeelme

Preach man couldn't have said it better myself. Let the stats fall where they may and just be consistent. I am very interested to see where Kyrie falls. He had a bad year shooting mid range and just average from three.

LoL. Yeah right. You say that, but when Scrub A is 1 point higher than perennial All Star B, all hell will break lose and you guys would be at the front of the linch mob.