The Great Ratings Debate (long)

[Kushmir]

Quote: Originally Posted by st0rmb11

On the topic of the rookie ratings. I hate NBA Live, and really haven't played it since NBA Live 2005, but to me, they rate rookies far better than 2K. If I remember correctly, LeBron was rated a 67 or so in NBA Live 2004. LeBron, to me, is the best rookie to come into the league since...Jordan. (no offense Kobe..but you were pretty bad your rookie year). For them to rate LeBron that low, proves that most rookies should be in that range. You don't rate them as they were in college (or high school in LeBron's case). You rate them as what a rookie is going to do in the league, and then maybe release a roster update after a month or so to update the ratings based on their play. I think Blake Griffin is a very overrated rookie, and having him rated in the 70s just proves it. To me, Griffin's a 62. He really has a lack of talent on offense. And he's not gonna be the same rebounder immediately in the NBA as he was in college.

totally agree here...( i had griffin rated a 65 and curry a 62) in my initial post I made an example of rookies who were "supposed" to come in and be world-beaters and weren't. i think its pretty safe to say judging talent is a crapshoot. on another note, while dirk's rating is a causing alot of controversy....i agree that he is more of a one-dimensional player but he's an elite player in his prime and so i think he deserves to be rated as such...which is why i gave him a higher rating than KG and Duncan (elite players--but on the decline)

[broy07]

to me one of the reasons that kg and td are rated so highly is that they are a significant step above the other pf's in the league today but neither of them are as good a scorer as dirk.

And another comment have you seen boozers rating 84 i think that boozer should be mid 70's

i maent to say they are a significant step up on the defensive end

[Kushmir]

c'mon now BRoy don't do boozer like that...people give booz a hard time because of what he did to Cleveland and because he always keeps his contract options open....here's the thing: he's as well-rounded as they come, plays CENTER sometimes because Okur is soft and is UNDERSIZED to boot.

his game doesn't have any weaknesses....seriously. he's a solid defender, shoots a ridiculous percentage for a guy who shoots from the high post as much as he does, might have the best left hand (for a righty) EVER....rebounds the hell out of the ball and gives you 20 ppg two of the last three years...(20 and 10 is serious) and doesn't DOMINATE the ball...change your mind yet?

84 is actually TOO LOW for boozer....i rated him an 86. the intangibles back it up...SERIOUSLY. check the last three years numbers...

[broy07]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kushmir

c'mon now BRoy don't do boozer like that...people give booz a hard time because of what he did to Cleveland and because he always keeps his contract options open....here's the thing: he's as well-rounded as they come, plays CENTER sometimes because Okur is soft and is UNDERSIZED to boot. his game doesn't have any weaknesses....seriously. he's a solid defender, shoots a ridiculous percentage for a guy who shoots from the high post as much as he does, might have the best left hand (for a righty) EVER....rebounds the hell out of the ball and gives you 20 ppg two of the last three years...(20 and 10 is serious) and doesn't DOMINATE the ball...change your mind yet? 84 is actually TOO LOW for boozer....i rated him an 86. the intangibles back it up...SERIOUSLY. check the last three years numbers...

okay Kushmir i respect that, i may have been a bit harsh on him but do you actually think that he is better than the former mvp of the league Dirk Nowitzki?

[Jukeman]

Quote: Originally Posted by broy07

okay Kushmir i respect that, i may have been a bit harsh on him but do you actually think that he is better than the former mvp of the league Dirk Nowitzki?

See this is why you shouldnt rate players base on what you would rank him vs player B, because I think Boozer is better at PF...Rankings is nothing but opinions....

Just give the guy the numbers he deserve, its simple math and I dont think 2K only base the ratings on gameplay and sim stats, I KNOW they used popularity to boost some ratings...If not, the rookies wouldnt be as high....

[Kushmir]

naaah...he's not better than dirk (lol @ you throwin' former MVP in there--we know Dog...WE KNOW) he's just more well-rounded...i rated Dirk a 91 (he's still in his PRIME) Dirk is one of those players who changed the position...teams have been trying to find another Dirk (see Darko, Tskitishvili, Okur and Bargnani) since he started playin' well...

[Kushmir]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jukeman

See this is why you shouldnt rate players base on what you would rank him vs player B, because I think Boozer is better at PF...Rankings is nothing but opinions.... Just give the guy the numbers he deserve, its simple math and I dont think 2K only base the ratings on gameplay and sim stats, I KNOW they used popularity to boost some ratings...If not, the rookies wouldnt be as high....

errr.... i don't know man. Boozer being "better" at PF than Dirk is subjective too. Dirk won an MVP and led a team to the NBA finals playin' PF y'know? could Boozer do that? he's always been a quality player but he's been at his best when he's the second option while Dirk has been the No. 1 guy since Finley left...

[kcarr]

Quote: Originally Posted by st0rmb11

On the topic of the rookie ratings. I hate NBA Live, and really haven't played it since NBA Live 2005, but to me, they rate rookies far better than 2K. If I remember correctly, LeBron was rated a 67 or so in NBA Live 2004. LeBron, to me, is the best rookie to come into the league since...Jordan. (no offense Kobe..but you were pretty bad your rookie year). For them to rate LeBron that low, proves that most rookies should be in that range. You don't rate them as they were in college (or high school in LeBron's case). You rate them as what a rookie is going to do in the league, and then maybe release a roster update after a month or so to update the ratings based on their play. I think Blake Griffin is a very overrated rookie, and having him rated in the 70s just proves it. To me, Griffin's a 62. He really has a lack of talent on offense. And he's not gonna be the same rebounder immediately in the NBA as he was in college.

I have to disagree that bron was the best rookie since jordan. I mean, shaq posted a solid double double with 23 and damn near 14 plus 3.5 blocks and shot nearly 56 percent from the floor. You could put penny up there with his 16, 6, 5, and 2 or cwebb the same year with 17, 9, 3, 2, and 1 and over 55 percent from the floor with 7 minutes less per game than bron. Grant hill put up rookie numbers almost identicle to bron. AI but up more points, assists, and steals than bron shooting within .001 of the same percentage and only getting 1.4 less boards than bron. Duncan put up 21 and nearly 12 with 2.5 blocks. Sure, bron was great as a rookie and has imporved into a better all around player than most of those guys but I don't really see him as being any better as a rookie than any of them.