If Rodman Is The Standard By Which All Players Are Rated Rebounds Wise..l

[NorthPhillyFis]

Glad this dude ain't rating the players in 2K16 bcuz if Wilt and Damascus had the same overall that would definitely send me to Live lmaooo

[Real2KInsider]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trackball

Rashidi fails to take three things into account. 1: The coaching system at the time, especially in Wilt's 100-point game, was simple: run the plays through Wilt, not the point guard.

Wilt's 100 point game was a bonafide joke and you should put some research into it. Both teams were intentionally fouling each other for the entire 4th like an Online game of 2K6 gone south.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...game-overhyped
"From accounts of how it went down, the Warriors spent almost the entire fourth quarter fouling to get the ball back and force-feeding Chamberlain the ball," writes CBS Sports' Royce Young. "New York coach Eddie Donovan said, 'The game was a farce. They would foul us and we would foul them.' Chamberlain's shot attempts by quarter: 14, 12, 16, 21. You think in a blowout in today's game that a team would keeping feeding their star like that?"

All hail your 1960s NBA.

Quote:

2: What was deemed an "assist" in the opinion of the scorer was judged much more strictly back then than it is now. The 2K commentators even bring this up at least once.

Which has not lead to greater assist numbers in the present day, per the Curry/Oscar example. There is a 30-possession difference but for a player like Wilt we are talking about the marginal difference between 2 APG and 3 APG for a player whose mental approach was to never pass up a shot (Literally 40 FGA and 17 FTA against 2 ASSISTS).

Quote:

3: The reason Wilt "needed a change in scenery" was because more often than not, his stupid teams refused to build around him. One guy can only do so much. Why do you think LeBron left for Miami in the first place? For a baseball example, Nolan Ryan. People bring up that he lost about as many games as he won. They fail to realize that he had virtually zero offensive support for virtually his whole career, according to SABR. Hard for a DPOY center to defend when his wing teammates keep leaving the opponent open for three, for instance.

These are bad analogies and you should feel bad.

1. Wilt didn't leave as a free agent and you should put in some research as to how/why he got himself traded. Not to mention comparing Wilt to LeBron as a teammate, leader, and person might be the most laughable thing I have read all week.

2. "Wins" are a terrible pitcher stat and always have been, it does nothing to measure a player's actual production or contextual variables. There is no basketball equivalent.

3. The Warriors were 11-33 at the time of Wilt's trade, losers of 11-straight. This was with Wilt averaging 39/24/3. To deflect all blame from him is either foolish or lazy, your pick.

4. Despite Wilt's massive stat lines, defense wasn't the reason they suffered. IT WAS OFFENSE.

1960: 88.7 ORTG (7th out of 8)
1961: 91.2 ORTG (6th out of 8)
1962: 94.5 ORTG (4th out of 9)
1963: 95.2 ORTG (5th out of 9)
1964: 93.0 ORTG (7th out of 9)
1965 (SF): 87.7 ORTG (9th out of 9)

This is what happens when you give over 40% of your offense to an unwilling passer who can't hit free throws.

1965 (PHI): 94.1 ORTG (5th out of 9)
1966: 95.3 ORTG (6th out of 9)

More of the same, Wilt playing the same and going nowhere.

1967: 101.3 ORTG (1st out of 10)

Wilt stopped shooting the ball every possession, started passing the ball, and the team INSTANTLY became the top offense in the league. They made no personnel changes between seasons, beyond Wilt not playing like an ***hole.

So yeah, feel free to educate me on the myths you bought into as a child about a player you never saw live or didn't put in the requisite research on to legitimately address me on "things I neglected to take into account".

Wilt was not an infallible god, free from blame, or the perfect NBA player. You stick with your myths and folk stories, I'll stick with my logic and evidence to the contrary.

EDIT: Crazy how people will respond when threatened with pace adjusted numbers that humanize and contextualize an historical era that they didn't live through.

[Taer]

No offense meant to anyone but any chosen system for ratings will have flaws in it.

The best that can be accomplished is to make sure that when on a 2K court, these players feel authentic and their game-play decisions and results make sense.

Bed was constantly working with the gameplay designers and engineers to ensure that the best result that could happen usually would. Its not perfect but their goal is what is important.

Once we get our play-time in and can provide constructive feedback there will be adjustments made. These guys come from our community they will not ignore their roots.

[Real2KInsider]

Quote: Originally Posted by BA2929

The center position is completely different now than it was back in the 61-62 season when Wilt scored 50ppg and grabbed 25 boards. Even trying to argue that DeMarcus Cousins or Andre Drummond is the same player as Wilt Chamberlain is laughable and ridiculous, no matter what Wilt's numbers correlate to in today's game.

As one specific skill? Really? It's unthinkable that a player in 2015 would be quantifiably better than a player who played 50 years ago? WHAT BLASPHEMY

There are a lot of people who try to discuss basketball without the knowledge or understanding of what a "possession" is (I'd like to think they're all Iverson fans), and how the differences they speak of have a measurable, yet minuscule impact towards the presented data.

"The data is only 90-95% accurate?"
"TOTALLY WORTHLESS"
"THROW IT IN THE TRASH"

Quote:

Oscar Robertson didn't have a 3pt line, so how is it fair to compare his 61-62 season to anyone that's playing today? Guy might have averaged 40ppg if there was one

LOL probably not considering he could barely dribble with his off-hand, much less shoot from outside of 15 feet.

LOL the notion of a 3pt line in 1960 when players couldn't even hit the shot in 1980
THIS BOARD

Quote:

The only fair way to compare NBA players with each other is to look at their numbers from the generation they played in and take those at face value, not adjust them to what the numbers are in future seasons. You can't just take LeBron's numbers and Per 36 them to 61-62 values. It's not fair to him and not fair to the generation of players that came before him.

Without being melodramatic, I overestimate this board seemingly every time I come here.

"HOLY CRAP A BALLPARK ESTIMATE LETS FREAK OUT NO NO NO NO NO NO"

[Sellaz32]

It's fun to debate, but ultimately you can't compare players from drastically different eras and you certainly can't use numbers to support your arguments. Fact is in 50 years there will invariably be guys on here making claims that LeBron couldn't compete in the current era. You can't simply ignore the context of the era, the style of play, and the bell curve of elite vs avg players that always exists.

Everybody has an era bias on here. For me, I grew up on 80's/90's era and truly believe it to be the best days of the NBA. But there are many who say the 00's were the best. But I don't agree with using stats and intellectualizing evidence without accounting for intangibles and the context of the era. Discounting old school players from that standpoint is blasphemy IMO.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[antdoggydogg]

Quote: Originally Posted by BA2929

The center position is completely different now than it was back in the 61-62 season when Wilt scored 50ppg and grabbed 25 boards. Even trying to argue that DeMarcus Cousins or Andre Drummond is the same player as Wilt Chamberlain is laughable and ridiculous, no matter what Wilt's numbers correlate to in today's game. /rant

Speaking for myself, I would never say Andre Drummond is a better player than Wilt Chamberlain. Wilt had a more refined offensive game. But its not blasphemous to say Drummond is his equal (maybe even better) as a rebounder, based off rebound percentages. It doesn't have to be one or the other, its okay for BOTH statements to be true. Wilt can be all-time great even if a guy like Dennis Rodman is a much better rebounder.

I know people are quick to throw out "percentage" stats/advanced stats. But all they really do is represent a piece of a pie. All it does is show that there was a certain amount of rebounds available a game/season. And Wilt Chamberlain grabbed "x" amount of those rebounds. That percentage can be realistically translated to modern players, or vice versa.

[Rocky]

Quote: Originally Posted by antdoggydogg

Speaking for myself, I would never say Andre Drummond is a better player than Wilt Chamberlain. Wilt had a more refined offensive game. But its not blasphemous to say Drummond is his equal (maybe even better) as a rebounder, based off rebound percentages. It doesn't have to be one or the other, its okay for BOTH statements to be true. Wilt can be all-time great even if a guy like Dennis Rodman is a much better rebounder. I know people are quick to throw out "percentage" stats/advanced stats. But all they really do is represent a piece of a pie. All it does is show that there was a certain amount of rebounds available a game/season. And Wilt Chamberlain grabbed "x" amount of those rebounds. That percentage can be realistically translated to modern players, or vice versa.

My only issue with that (and we had a huge discussion on this years back on the main NBA board) is that in an alternate universe where they both played in the same era, Wilt Chamberlain could theoretically be a superior rebounder to Drummond due to just pure physical talent. However, you would be hard pressed to say that Drummond could ever replicate the physical skills that Wilt displayed. By most accounts, Wilt was inches taller, longer, quicker, jumped higher, stronger, and had almost superhuman stamina (in his younger days). In fact, the only player you could legitimately compare him to athleticism wise is David Robinson and if you even believed just a quarter of his athletic feats (just google them), Shaquille O'Neal.

So if Drummond and Wilt got the same DRB rating, Wilt should still be a noticeably better rebounder because of his freakish athleticism.

[Trackball]

When the rest of the team sucks, OF COURSE you're going to go to your best player more often.

It's not like he was shooting way under 50%. Like Kobe. Or Iverson.

By the way, not only did you earlier call Wilt a "bum" (making it hard to take you seriously), but you are being REALLY mean-spirited, Rashidi. Don't get on the mods' bad side again. Even if you were right, who wants to believe a jerk?

Bill Walton relayed a story of Wilt talking to Michael Jordan. According to Walton, Wilt said:

"In your day, they changed the rules to make it EASIER for you to dominate; in MY day, they changed the rules to make it more difficult."

End of conversation. Advantage, Wilt Chamberlain.

...We've derailed the topic quite a bit, haven't we?