NBA 2K19 Roster Update Details (1-10)

[ksuttonjr76]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rashidi

The season isn't over yet. Season data is incomplete. Which means it's acceptable for last season's production to still merge in and smooth things out and prevent ridiculous outliers. For example Kyle Anderson (2019) Inside: 80-119 (67%) Close: 37-78 (47%) Mid: 13-26 (50%) 3pt: 9-34 (27%) Kyle Anderson (2018) Inside: 125-179 (70%) Close: 80-171 (47%) Mid: 19-47 (40%) 3pt: 19-61 (31%) Or how about this one Omri Casspi (2019) Inside: 41-51 (80%) Close: 6-25 (24%) Mid: 0-0 3pt: 10-29 (35%) Omri Casspi (2018) Inside: 74-105 (71%) Close: 36-79 (46%) Mid: 0-1 (0%) 3pt: 10-22 (46%) The league is littered with these and it's not just shooting. Any counting stat has similar fluctuation. Bogdanovic for example has yet to block a shot this season (he blocked 8 last year). Is it time to give him a lower rating than J.J. Barea, who has blocked 1 shot this season? Or does Bogdanovic get the benefit of the doubt that he will actually record a few in the next 40 games? Is that attribute as important as his 3pt shooting? No, of course not, but each of these attributes is a judgement call that a roster editor has to make, as sticking with pure stats for a small sample size is simply not an effective measurement tool. (If someone DID apply all purely 2019 statistics to a roster, the results would be scoffed at. Nobody is interested in a roster where Donovan Mitchell has the same rating as Tim Hardaway Jr, Gary Harris, and Kent Bazemore). I'm just gonna say this isn't factually correct since tendencies and teammates obviously affect player production. Besides that point, Jordan lead the league in PER and Win Shares that year, which was his 7th straight season of doing so (a feat only otherwise accomplished by Wilt Chamberlain). Numbers don't care who the media voted for that season.

Here's the thing...my answer would be yes. His block rating should be lowered to 26.

[Kushmir]

Barkley was the MVP....but like Rashidi alluded to, no one was individually better than Michael after 87 or so. It was one of the years they decided to give it to someone else who was deserving based on how well PHX played.

Barkley 52% FG, 25.6ppg, 30% 3pt, 76% FT,12.2rpg, 5ast
Jordan 49% FG, 32.6ppg, 35%3pt, 83% FT, 6.7rpg, 5.5apg

Quote: Originally Posted by ksuttonjr76

I'm just not a fan of rating players on reputation over actual production.

Me either. You'll probably notice I haven't added one thing about reputation, i've referenced production exclusively.

[jeebs9]

This is something I bring up every year in these threads. It's hard to drop a well know shooter.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[ksuttonjr76]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kushmir

Barkley was the MVP....but like Rashidi alluded to, no one was individually better than Michael after 87 or so. It was one of the years they decided to give it to someone else who was deserving based on how well PHX played. Barkley 52% FG, 25.6ppg, 30% 3pt, 76% FT,12.2rpg, 5ast Jordan 49% FG, 32.6ppg, 35%3pt, 83% FT, 6.7rpg, 5.5apg Me either. You'll probably notice I haven't added one thing about reputation, i've referenced production exclusively.

Hmmmm....I would have to see the advance stats. The traditional stats would make them "close" in my book. My gut instinct says they would be the highest rated players at their respective positions, then would be 1-2 points of each other. Granted, I don't care about overalls. I just want their ratings to be close to their real life production.

[Kushmir]

Quote: Originally Posted by ksuttonjr76

The traditional stats would make them "close" in my book. My gut instinct says they would be the highest rated players at their respective positions, then would be 1-2 points of each other.

1993 Finals: (4-2 Chicago)

Jordan 41ppg, 8.5rpg, 6.3 ast, 50% FG, 40% 3pt, 69% FT
Barkley 27ppg, 13rpg, 5.5 ast, 47% FG, 25% 3pt, 75% FT

Close? not so much....keep in mind i'm a Philly fan so I loved seeing Barkley on the biggest stage after we wasted him for the last 5yrs he was on the Sixers. But production never lies if you know where to look. MJ was head and shoulders above whoever was second best. No one was within 5 pts of him lol. My advice? Leave the rating to the professionals.

[ksuttonjr76]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kushmir

1993 Finals: (4-2 Chicago) Jordan 41ppg, 8.5rpg, 6.3 ast, 50% FG, 40% 3pt, 69% FT Barkley 27ppg, 13rpg, 5.5 ast, 47% FG, 25% 3pt, 75% FT Close? not so much....keep in mind i'm a Philly fan so I loved seeing Barkley on the biggest stage after we wasted him for the last 5yrs he was on the Sixers. But production never lies if you know where to look. MJ was head and shoulders above whoever was second best. No one was within 5 pts of him lol. My advice? Leave the rating to the professionals.

Those are Final stats, so now we're comparing apples to oranges. Clearly, MJ clearly had the superior performance in the head to head team matchup. You posted the season stats earlier which painted a different picture, hence my comment about advanced stats. Based on the traditional stats, neither player seemed that overwhelming better than the other.

Rashidi will eventually put this argument to a rest.

[Kushmir]

Quote: Originally Posted by ksuttonjr76

Those are Final stats, so now we're comparing apples to oranges.

Actually nope, among people who pay attention to this short of thing, playoff performance is actually held in higher esteem. Players who "raise their games" are actually looked at more favorably because of the difficulty of the opponents--its one of the many reasons MJ is considered the GOAT....but sure lol.

[ksuttonjr76]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kushmir

Actually nope, among people who pay attention to this short of thing, playoff performance is actually held in higher esteem. Players who "raise their games" are actually looked at more favorably because of the difficulty of the opponents--its one of the many reasons MJ is considered the GOAT....but sure lol.

Kush...we're talking about two different things. I'm purely talking about x data/stats should reflect x ratings in NBA 2K. It's that simple for me. If Player A is statistically better than Player B in the current season, then Player A's overall/ratings should reflect it. If Player B has x number of years in the league, then I don't mind giving Player B rating boosts based on their career stats.

What you're talking about is basically reputation. MJ is regarded the GOAT, so his ratings and overall should reflect that despite his statistical performance relative to his peers. I simply don't believe in that when in comes to current NBA rosters. I'm more flexible when it comes to the All-Time and Classic teams.

However, Curry and Thompson (to name a few players, but I'm pretty confident that there are more examples) are rated based on reputation. In past 2K games, there were always players who were clearly past their prime IRL, but were still badged up and rated like prime players. For me, I'm always about the current season. I only care about the past season ratings when it comes to a "starter" roster to begin the season. After that...