NBA 2K13 3pt Rating Formula

[NFCastle]

Quote: Originally Posted by kackle85

I did however come up with a formula I really like to come up with what a players overall rating should be. Take the players average PER over a 3 year period. Subtract 15 from that number (15 is the league average PER) Multiply that by 1.6 and add 75. Adust a few points one way or the other depending on the defensive skill for that particular player. Ex 1 Kobe Bryants average PER over the last 3 years is 22.613 Subtract 15 and you get 7.613 Multiply by 1.6 and you get 12.181 Add 75 and you get about an 87 overall but Kobe is considered a very good defender so i would bump it to high 80's or low 90's overall. Ex 2 Ben Gordon avg 3 year PER is 13.567 Subtract 15 and you get -1.433 Multiply by 1.6 to get -2.29 Add 75 and you get 72.703 or about a 73 but Gordon is a notoriously poor defender so subtract a few points and you get about a low 70 overall. Works great for me in determining about what a player should be rated overall.

Don't like it at all. It's been said before, and I'll say it again, OVERALL RATING MEANS NOTHING IN VIDEO GAMES.

The important thing is to rate each attribute accurately.

For example: Kevin Love is a strong rebounder, and a good shooter, aside from this season anyway. Good shooting numbers, 99/99 rebounding, high offensive awareness are some things Love should have.

Now if he comes out to an 80 overall because of his lackluster defense, so be it. But to give him a high on ball defense, low post defense, block, steal rating to boost his overall is ridiculous, because he's not going to play anything like his real life counterpart. You'll get a Kevin Love that scores 25 ppg, gets 13 rpg, 2.5 bpg, and 2 spg.


Another one is guys like Steve Novak. He comes out to about a 73-74 overall, and literally the only thing he is good for is spot up shooting. His shooting ratings should be high, he can't rebound, he can't pass, he can't play defense, he doesn't get steals, he doesnt get blocks, his defensive awareness isn't good, he's not real athletic...so to get him to a 70 overall without giving him unrealistic boosts in other categories isn't going to happen.

Rajon Rondo, his comes out to an 80 overall. How are you supposed to rate Rondo to have the best passing in the league, lockdown defense, decent shooting numbers, great offensive and defensive awareness, high steal numbers, high speed/quickness and have him come out to an 80 overall? It just doesn't work.


As much as we may want to try to make overall relevant, it just isn't. 2k's formula for deciding what an overall rating should be is flawed. What they should do is untie it from all other ratings, and allow it to be editable. This way you can have accurate ratings for players, and the overall can reflect the "value of their play" so that guys like Steve Novak aren't a 50 overall with 2k's system, and guys like Tony Allen/Thabo Sefolosha that are defensive specialists who start aren't 60 overall and get stuck riding the bench based on computer overall logic.

[svedda]

95+ Hall of Famer aka Lebron
90+ Superstar aka Durant
85+ Star aka Love
80+ All-Star aka M Gasol
75+ Good starter aka Afflalo
70+ Good backup aka Taj Gibson
65+ Specialist aka Korver
60+ 10-12 men aka Joel Anthony
55+ IR players aka scrub A

My personal preference, don't have a formula yet or need one really lol.

[svedda]

Quote: Originally Posted by NFCastle

Don't like it at all. It's been said before, and I'll say it again, OVERALL RATING MEANS NOTHING IN VIDEO GAMES. The important thing is to rate each attribute accurately. For example: Kevin Love is a strong rebounder, and a good shooter, aside from this season anyway. Good shooting numbers, 99/99 rebounding, high offensive awareness are some things Love should have. Now if he comes out to an 80 overall because of his lackluster defense, so be it. But to give him a high on ball defense, low post defense, block, steal rating to boost his overall is ridiculous, because he's not going to play anything like his real life counterpart. You'll get a Kevin Love that scores 25 ppg, gets 13 rpg, 2.5 bpg, and 2 spg. Another one is guys like Steve Novak. He comes out to about a 73-74 overall, and literally the only thing he is good for is spot up shooting. His shooting ratings should be high, he can't rebound, he can't pass, he can't play defense, he doesn't get steals, he doesnt get blocks, his defensive awareness isn't good, he's not real athletic...so to get him to a 70 overall without giving him unrealistic boosts in other categories isn't going to happen. Rajon Rondo, his comes out to an 80 overall. How are you supposed to rate Rondo to have the best passing in the league, lockdown defense, decent shooting numbers, great offensive and defensive awareness, high steal numbers, high speed/quickness and have him come out to an 80 overall? It just doesn't work. As much as we may want to try to make overall relevant, it just isn't. 2k's formula for deciding what an overall rating should be is flawed. What they should do is untie it from all other ratings, and allow it to be editable. This way you can have accurate ratings for players, and the overall can reflect the "value of their play" so that guys like Steve Novak aren't a 50 overall with 2k's system, and guys like Tony Allen/Thabo Sefolosha that are defensive specialists who start aren't 60 overall and get stuck riding the bench based on computer overall logic.

Mostly agreed but overall does matter with trades etc.

[kackle85]

Rondo comes out at about an 82 if you average his PER over the last 3 or 4 years and i would ad up to 5 points due to his defensive abilities bringing him to an 87 overall which seems just right to me.

Love is about an 87 with the formula and subtract a few points for suspect D and he comes out to about an 83 or 84. Again.....seems just right to me.

The PER formula only factors in individual stats so you have to use scouting reports and common knowledge to adjust the overall based off of defensive ability because that cant nescisarilly be judged by stats.

I have had great success with this formula without having to artificially boost or lower a players individual ratings at all.

[Find_the_Door]

Quote: Originally Posted by svedda

95+ Hall of Famer aka Lebron 90+ Superstar aka Durant 85+ Star aka Love 80+ All-Star aka M Gasol 75+ Good starter aka Afflalo 70+ Good backup aka Taj Gibson 65+ Specialist aka Korver 60+ 10-12 men aka Joel Anthony 55+ IR players aka scrub A My personal preference, don't have a formula yet or need one really lol.

This simply deals in overalls that do nothing to separate players from one another.

[MarvinOida]

K I'm in Tier 5 for myCareer (270+ 3s, don't remember, either way higher than Ray in 05) 52+44=96, My Real Rating = 99. Close enough. I don't remember my Career 3pt but 44% is the lowest based on memory, range of 44 to 47%. With 47% I got 99. So it's accurate I guess, I don't really think the Highest Made in a Season is good though, I just feel that, I have no proof though as in why.

[bm011]

Good idea and pretty accurate. However, there should probably be a few tweaks. For example, Steve Novak should be higher than an 84. There are a few others that I don't agree with, but overall I think its a good formula.

[growndhawgg]

I think the ratings should be simpler. I think the game should emphasize fantasy numbers and use live updates that determine a star rating. 1-5 stars on specific attributes, if you have lots of stars, then you're an all-star? PER is ESPN's justification for favoring certain players. There is an actual stat line called "value added." It makes more sense, from a competitive standpoint to bunch players in simple 1-5 tiers.