The 90 overalls

[MGSW]

Quote: Originally Posted by Scramz718

IMHO he should be rated base off his production. He didn't play most of the season because of injury. 27 games probably isn't a big enough sample size but 25 6 4 51 fg% 40 3pt%. He should get the benefit of the doubt. I think a 91 is okay, I have to see his individual attributes tho.

He should be rated based on his production. And his production was this: he played 27 games out of 82.

That's bad. In fact it's terrible.

Until he's proven he's healthy. He shouldn't be higher than 91. He's only a 91 based on who he was pre-injury. Same reason Kobe isn't in the high 70s/low 80s (like he should be).

[dwnz]

Definitely AD imo. I'd consider CP3 to be a better all-round player than Westbrook too, would expect he'd be next in line.

[Sundown]

Quote: Originally Posted by MGSW

He should be rated based on his production. And his production was this: he played 27 games out of 82. That's bad. In fact it's terrible. Until he's proven he's healthy. He shouldn't be higher than 91. He's only a 91 based on who he was pre-injury. Same reason Kobe isn't in the high 70s/low 80s (like he should be).

Thing is Durant was at his peak before his injury just a season ago, so a healthy Durant that resembles a pre-injury Durant is still actually a thing.

Kobe suffered one of the hardest injuries to come back from at a point where players already decline severely, but that's actually been used as an excuse for his performance since. The injury has now officially worked in his favor coming onto the THIRD 2K release now. That's just silly.

Of course I'm all for rating players lower due to injury so we get to play the "getting into game shape" versions of themselves, and they can be rated higher as soon as they improve-- but Kobe and Rose are overrated from launch assuming marketability reasons, and 2K seems much more hesitant to drop a star quickly than they are to bump him, so inflated ratings take much longer to see a correction (like half a season if ever), and a player like Kobe is STILL 85 at year's end after a terrible performance. I know I'm belaboring the point but this really sticks out in 2K's process in terms of serious analysis of players when it comes to rosters and ratings.

[slowdifference]

Quote: Originally Posted by MGSW

He should be rated based on his production. And his production was this: he played 27 games out of 82. That's bad. In fact it's terrible. Until he's proven he's healthy. He shouldn't be higher than 91. He's only a 91 based on who he was pre-injury. Same reason Kobe isn't in the high 70s/low 80s (like he should be).

They have a durability rating for a reason. As long as that is reflected properly, his other attributes should remain unaffected until proven otherwise

[MGSW]

Quote: Originally Posted by slowdifference

They have a durability rating for a reason. As long as that is reflected properly, his other attributes should remain unaffected until proven otherwise

They didn't do that for Rose. Why should they do it for KD?

Until he's proven he's still as good. He shouldn't get the attributes.

Don't know why everyone's so wound up about it. If he's as good as he was before they will change the ratings to reflect that. If he's worse, they'll drop it even further. Fairs fair. It'll all work out.

[slowdifference]

Quote: Originally Posted by MGSW

They didn't do that for Rose. Why should they do it for KD? Until he's proven he's still as good. He shouldn't get the attributes. Don't know why everyone's so wound up about it. If he's as good as he was before they will change the ratings to reflect that. If he's worse, they'll drop it even further. Fairs fair. It'll all work out.

Actually, they did give D Rose benefit of the doubt. It was the second time he got hurt they lowered his rating.

[RocketTMac1]

It has to be Anthony Davis. I would put Russ in there because the dude is a beast. So I hope he gets an 89. He is easily a top 3 guard in the league.

Lillard is in the background salty right now saying he didn't have a fair shake at being a 90.

[da ThRONe]

Quote: Originally Posted by MGSW

He should be rated based on his production. And his production was this: he played 27 games out of 82. That's bad. In fact it's terrible. Until he's proven he's healthy. He shouldn't be higher than 91. He's only a 91 based on who he was pre-injury. Same reason Kobe isn't in the high 70s/low 80s (like he should be).

So it's perfectly OK to assume he won't be back to his normal talent level? But there's something wrong with assuming he'll be fine?