NBA 2K16 News Post

NBA 2K16 Player Ratings & Screenshots - Day Five: Morrow, Johnson, Turner & More

06:55 PM - September 8, 2015 by 23

NBA players continue posting their NBA 2K16 player ratings, along with in-game screenshots of themselves in action. Below are the players that have either posted on Twitter, Facebook or Instagram today.

(Click the name(s) below, to see the screenshot.)

Anthony Morrow - (Overall Rating - 74)
Stanley Johnson - (Overall Rating - 73)
Myles Turner - (Overall Rating - 73)
Cameron Payne - (Overall Rating - 72)
Devin Booker - (Overall Rating - 72)
Devyn Marble - (Overall Rating - 67)

Previously confirmed player ratings: (Click the name(s) below, to see the screenshot)

Kevin Durant - (Overall Rating - 91)
John Wall (Overall Rating - 87)
Kobe Bryant (Overall Rating - 85)
Andre Drummond - (Overall Rating - 83)
Isaiah Thomas - (Overall Rating - 81)
Hassan Whiteside - (Overall Rating - 81)
Rudy Gobert - (Overall Rating - 79)
Jared Sullinger - (Overall Rating - 77)
Tony Wroten - (Overall Rating - 75)
Aaron Brooks (Overall Rating - 75)
C. J. Miles - (Overall Rating - 73)
Isaiah Canaan - (Overall Rating - 73)
Terrence Ross (Overall Rating - 73)
Evan Fournier - (Overall Rating - 72)
Shelvin Mack - (Overall Rating - 72)
C.J. McCollum - (Overall Rating - 72)
Langston Galloway (Overall Rating - 72)
Kyle Anderson - (Overall Rating - 71)
Shane Larkin - (Overall Rating - 70)
Spencer Dinwiddie - (Overall Rating - 70)
Anthony Tolliver - (Overall Rating - 70)
Quincy Acy - (Overall Rating - 69)
Perry Jones III - (Overall Rating - 69)
Pierre Jackson - (Overall Rating - 69)

Game: NBA 2K16Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PC / PS3 / PS4 / Xbox 360 / Xbox OneVotes for game: 45 - View All

NBA 2K16 Videos

Member Comments

# 61 tetoleetd @ 09/09/15 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottyp180


	Comments like that always make me laugh. I mean first of all it is a brand new rating system this year where legends set the bar. Not only do we not know how these ratings will play out but it should be obvious that rookies will be on the lower end. Second even if the rating system was the same it is difficult to tell if a player's overall is accurate or not without playing. For the sake of argument let's say Kyrie Irving and Chris Paul had the same rating. They are still going to play completely different because of their play style amd strengths. Kyrie is more of a scoring point guard that makes his own shots where as Paul is more of a pass first guard that creates shots for other players, not to say he can't score as well. Just because a player has a specific number rating doesn't mean it won't accurately portray his skillset. And if not at least we get constant roster updates and the ability to roster edit

how exactly does my comment make you laugh? im basically saying that overall doesnt matter and individual attributes determine how a player plays...

# 62 Mauer4MVP @ 09/09/15 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevertheles109


	Rashidi, I appreciate the valuable information you provide to OS. Nevertheless, the reason your messages aren't heard as clearly as they are written is due to your snobbish/arrogant remarks when they are unnecessary. The bolded above is a clear example man. You attracts bees with honey, not vinegar.

No wonder my Bee farm went down the tubes so quickly...

# 63 Real2KInsider @ 09/09/15 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LorenzoDC


	For example, of the new attribute ratings systems is based off of an all time set of benchmarks for corresponding player behavior/stats, then, by adopting a more standard ratings philosophy, did something about the balance among positions change? That is, did they discover that, for some reason, their past subjective ratings favored bigs too much? I would find that hard to believe having played the game a few years, but was that an outcome?

It is nothing so complex as that. The OVR formula for PF/C has badly needed re-evaluation for the past decade or so. PGs conversely will always rate highly via 2K OVR. Rondo had a higher rating than Dirk for a number of years.

Or, as they reworked ratings by attribute, did they also try to benchmark past all time PER ratings against the game's OVR ratings, and as a result, try to rework the way they computed OVR? That is, did the OVR formula under the hood change this year in how it weights attributes by position? If so, why, and based on what?

Quote:


	Do they think that, by trying to become more standardized in ratings, that the game will now reflect the relative historical weakness of bigs overall in the league now? Or does the OVR rating suffer because bigs get fewer stats in today's game the way it is played?

Bigs are great right now. Center is deeper than it's really ever been, and that includes the heralded 90s. The league has always been top-heavy at center. The 15-20 ranked centers of today would steamroll the 10-15 centers of twenty years ago.

The problem is 2K doesn't evaluate the position properly, as least in the context of what makes a good big man in the year 2015.

# 64 vannwolfhawk @ 09/09/15 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rashidi


	Bigs are great right now. Center is deeper than it's really ever been, and that includes the heralded 90s. The league has always been top-heavy at center. The 15-20 ranked centers of today would steamroll the 10-15 centers of twenty years ago. The problem is 2K doesn't evaluate the position properly, as least in the context of what makes a good big man in the year 2015.

Im going to have to respectfully disagree with you here. I think bigs were more skilled around the hoop and better defenders back in 80's and 90's although not as athletic obviously. There more PF today than centers. There was a lot of depth with centers back in the day. Even guys like let's say a Ric Smits, Kevin Willis, Bill Laimbeer would translate just fine in today's NBA. Centers now aren't your prototypical center per say. They stretch the floor, not great at any 1 thing, lack post moves, etc. I do think there is a young wave of kids coming in however like this last draft and few years before it that by the time they are done can compare to what your talking about. But it's all debatable I guess.

How would you suggest 2k should rate and evaluate todays big man? To make sure ratings are comparable to all positions?

# 65 Mauer4MVP @ 09/09/15 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vannwolfhawk


	Im going to have to respectfully disagree with you here. I think bigs were more skilled around the hoop and better defenders back in 80's and 90's although not as athletic obviously. There more PF today than centers. There was a lot of depth with centers back in the day. Even guys like let's say a Ric Smits, Kevin Willis, Bill Laimbeer would translate just fine in today's NBA. Centers now aren't your prototypical center per say. They stretch the floor, not great at any 1 thing, lack post moves, etc. I do think there is a young wave of kids coming in however like this last draft and few years before it that by the time they are done can compare to what your talking about. But it's all debatable I guess. How would you suggest 2k should rate and evaluate todays big man? To make sure ratings are comparable to all positions?

I think he's saying just purely depth. It obviously isn't close to the days of Shaq, Hakeem, Ewing, etc.

But right now: Howard, Gasol, Noah, Noel, Towns, Gortat, Len, Adams, Dieng, Gobert, Okafor, Gasol, Horford, Chandler, Plumlee, Bogut, Drummond, Valanciunas, Vucevic, Cousins, etc.

There are a lot of quality centers right now.

# 66 Sundown @ 09/09/15 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LorenzoDC


	Or, as they reworked ratings by attribute, did they also try to benchmark past all time PER ratings against the game's OVR ratings, and as a result, try to rework the way they computed OVR? That is, did the OVR formula under the hood change this year in how it weights attributes by position? If so, why, and based on what?

I think any attempt to get OVR to align with PER is a flawed enterprise. PER rewards chuckers and doesn't factor in IQ, decision making, non-box-score oriented defense, and anything that isn't countable as a simple stat. It's basically just slightly more advanced box-score reading.

I mean for example, going you'd think a 13 PER should equate to a low 70's OVR, and a 16 PER should be around 77.

I'm pretty sure Draymond Green deserves more than a 77, and the Finals MVP more than a 72.

# 67 Scvllp @ 09/09/15 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mauer4MVP


	I think he's saying just purely depth. It obviously isn't close to the days of Shaq, Hakeem, Ewing, etc. But right now: Howard, Gasol, Noah, Noel, Towns, Gortat, Len, Adams, Dieng, Gobert, Okafor, Gasol, Horford, Chandler, Plumlee, Bogut, Drummond, Valanciunas, Vucevic, Cousins, etc. There are a lot of quality centers right now.

How could you not even list Davis?

# 68 Mauer4MVP @ 09/09/15 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scvllp


	How could you not even list Davis?

Lol wow. I was probably thinking of him at the 4 because of Asik, but I guess if I list Noel and Okafor, he should be on there as well.

# 69 vannwolfhawk @ 09/09/15 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mauer4MVP


	I think he's saying just purely depth. It obviously isn't close to the days of Shaq, Hakeem, Ewing, etc. But right now: Howard, Gasol, Noah, Noel, Towns, Gortat, Len, Adams, Dieng, Gobert, Okafor, Gasol, Horford, Chandler, Plumlee, Bogut, Drummond, Valanciunas, Vucevic, Cousins, etc. There are a lot of quality centers right now.

I knew what he meant hence my response. He said today's 15-20 were better than yester years 10-15. Obviously the centers of Ewing, Akeem, etc blow today's out of the water. But everybody had a center back then and almost everyone could play with their back to the basket. But I don't want to derail thread.

# 70 stillfeelme @ 09/09/15 10:24 PM

I don't think centers are deeper now. 90's centers was probably the best era.

You could argue that that there are more athletic centers but a large % of centers can not score on the post if you feed them the ball and a large amount can't hit a shot out of the paint or shoot a free throw.

A large amount of centers with their lack of post scoring have mainly become space creators with pick and rolls and lob catchers. I would actually expect centers to be lower rated compared to greats for this reason alone.

What type of post offense you give to Dwight when he shoots 43% on post ups on 5 attempts per game? If I can easily negate your threat of dunking by fouling you and have your FT shooting be your Achilles then yeah I can't argue for today's area.

The centers should be the easiest to rank out of off the positions. Interior offense scoring, def contest ,blocking, rebound, and dunking should be all play the highest.

# 71 Real2KInsider @ 09/10/15 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluFu


	Backcourt players (18) are +6 (+0.77) Frontcourt players (21) are -22 (-3.9)

SF formula is similar to SG and nothing like PF/C

But sure try to correct me on something you don't know anything about

# 72 Real2KInsider @ 09/10/15 04:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sundown


	I think any attempt to get OVR to align with PER is a flawed enterprise. PER rewards chuckers and doesn't factor in IQ, decision making, non-box-score oriented defense, and anything that isn't countable as a simple stat. It's basically just slightly more advanced box-score reading.

I merely used PER as a guideline. PER doesn't measure defense, which is more important than offense for a center (specifically, post offense). It just so happens a lot of centers (Tyson Chandler mold) are elite pick and roll finishers.

My personal PG ratings
95 (+5) Chris Paul (LAC, 26.0 PER)
94 (-1) Stephen Curry (GSW, 28.0 PER)
91 (-3) Russell Westbrook (OKC, 29.1 PER)
90 (+3) John Wall (WAS, 19.9 PER)
89 (+1) Kyrie Irving (CLE, 21.5 PER)
87 (+10) George Hill (IND, 21.5 PER)
87 (+2) Damian Lillard (POR, 20.7 PER)
87 (+2) Jeff Teague (ATL, 20.6 PER)
85 (NC) Kyle Lowry (TOR, 19.3 PER)
85 (-1) Mike Conley (MEM, 18.6 PER)

85 (+4) Ty Lawson (HOU, 18.5 PER)
84 (+3) Brandon Jennings (DET, 19.7 PER)
84 (+4) Jrue Holiday (NOP, 18.8 PER)
84 (+1) Eric Bledsoe (PHX, 18.4 PER)
84 (+4) Darren Collison (SAC, 17.5 PER)
83 (+2) Kemba Walker (CHA, 17.6 PER)
83 (+5) Reggie Jackson (DET, 17.2 PER)
82 (+1) Isaiah Thomas (BOS, 20.6 PER)
82 (-2) Tony Parker (SAS, 15.9 PER)
82 (-2) Derrick Rose (CHI, 15.9 PER)

There are few PGs who substantially impact a game defensively, so there isn't much PER noise. Each other position has defensive specialists but for PGs it's pretty smooth sailing from the top down.

# 73 swac07 @ 09/10/15 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swac07


	Sent from my Illudium Q-36 Space Modulator using Tapatalk

23 could you add Meeks to the master list

# 74 Real2KInsider @ 09/10/15 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vannwolfhawk


	Im going to have to respectfully disagree with you here. I think bigs were more skilled around the hoop and better defenders back in 80's and 90's although not as athletic obviously. There more PF today than centers. There was a lot of depth with centers back in the day. Even guys like let's say a Ric Smits, Kevin Willis, Bill Laimbeer would translate just fine in today's NBA.

I have discussed an analyzed this this pretty extensively (including on the Sim Hangouts where Scott and Gonzo love their nostalgia goggles).

What people often forget is that beyond the top players, centers in the 80s/90s were BBQ Chicken (which made things easier for the guys who could play). Hakeem used to joke with Kenny Smith that he only had to play 5 times a year while Kenny had to play every single night.

Let's re-wind 20 years. Jordan was out of the league, Robinson won MVP, and Hakeem/Shaq matched in the Finals right after Hakeem/Ewing the previous year. The league even shortened the 3pt line, making centers nigh impossible to double (manufacturing a cinderella run for the Rockets that has never been replicated in any era of NBA history). This was the pinnacle of the dominant center.

EAST
Magic (57): Shaquille O'Neal (28.6 PER), Tree Rollins (7.0 PER)
Knicks (55): Patrick Ewing (21.9 PER), Herb Williams (7.7 PER)
Pacers (52): Rik Smits (19.5 PER), LaSalle Thompson (6.8 PER)
Hornets (50): Alonzo Mourning (20.1 PER), Robert Parish (10.1 PER)
Bulls (47): Will Perdue (16.3 PER), Luc Longley (12.3 PER), Bill Wennington (11.6 PER)
Cavaliers (43): Tyrone Hill (16.8 PER), Michael Cage (13.5 PER)
Hawks (42): Andrew Lang (13.1 PER), Jon Koncak (9.5 PER)
Celtics (35): Eric Montross (12.1 PER), Pervis Ellison (13.3 PER)
Bucks (34): Alton Lister (10.2 PER), Eric Mobley (14.2 PER)
Heat (32): John Salley (11.4 PER), Matt Geiger (12.9 PER)
Nets (30): Benoit Benjamin (13.9 PER), Dwayne Schintzius (6.2 PER)
Pistons (28): Mark West (12.8 PER), Oliver Miller (16.9 PER)
Sixers (24): Shawn Bradley (14.8 PER), Derrick Alston (11.6 PER)
Bullets (21): Gheorghe Muresan (17.4 PER), Kevin Duckworth (9.9 PER)

Out east we can see pretty see that the quality of your big-man was almost directly relative to your team's success - and that most teams simply didn't have one.

WEST
Spurs (62): David Robinson (29.1 PER)
Jazz (60): Felton Spencer (12.3 PER), James Donaldson (7.9 PER)
Suns (59): Joe Kleine (9.8 PER), Danny Schayes (13.2 PER)
Sonics (57): Sam Perkins (16.2 PER), Ervin Johnson (9.6 PER)
Lakers (48): Vlade Divac (20.5 PER), Sam Bowie (10.4 PER)
Rockets (47): Hakeem Olajuwon (26.0 PER)
Blazers (44): Chris Dudley (10.9 PER)
Nuggets (41): Dikembe Mutombo (17.0 PER), Bison Dele (13.9 PER)
Kings (39): Olden Polynice (14.7 PER), Duane Causwell (11.4 PER)
Mavericks (36): Lorenzo Williams (10.3 PER), Roy Tarpley (17.8 PER)
Warriors (26): Rony Seikaly (12.7 PER), Cliff Rozier (11.5 PER), Victor Alexander (12.8 PER)
Wolves (21): Sean Rooks (12.6 PER), Greg Foster (10.3 PER)
Clippers (17): Tony Massenburg (11.7 PER), Eric Riley (14.7 PER)

The west ran more to compensate for it's lack of Cs. It is worth noting that Malone and Barkley were the first great PFs and the beginning of a league-wide transition.

ANECDOTES
Perhaps I remember just how many bad centers there were because I collected basketball cards in the mid-90s. This exercise was a trip down memory lane in that regard.

The reason to use PER is it's measuring production relative to the rest of the league, where 15.0 is the standardized league average. Only two backup centers in the entire league had a PER > 15 (and we know what happened to Tarpley after this season).

Robinson, Hakeem, and Shaq played so many minutes due to their dominance that they effectively didn't even have backups. Chris Dudley on the other hand didn't have a true backup because the Blazers would slide Buck Williams from PF to C and Cliff Robinson from SF to PF.

BBRef lists P.J. Brown as a C for the Nets but in actuality he was their starting SF next to Derrick Coleman and Benoit Benjamin. That sums up 90s-era ball in a nutshell. Teams often employed double-PF lineups in what is surely the antithesis to modern NBA ball (big ball, killing your own spacing for a marginal advantage on the boards). Teams NEVER do that now, and often now employ double-SF lineups (made popular by SVG w/ Turkoglu/Lewis in Orlando).

Yinka Dare was drafted 14th overall and played in only 1 game due to how big a project he was. Dare had a 6.2 PER in his four year career and is regarded by some as the worst NBA player of all-time (certainly among those drafted 14th overall). Teams drafted bust centers in the first round with high frequency searching for "the next big thing" which was really akin to just throwing **** at the wall. Drafting stiffs is a practice long-since abandoned as teams properly evaluate big men and what sort of role they should be playing.

Quote:


	How would you suggest 2k should rate and evaluate todays big man? To make sure ratings are comparable to all positions?

Well, to start off, there's a reason the NBA fell away from this big-centric era. A player who changed the NBA landscape forever. Michael Jordan. People often talk about his 6 championships but rarely mention that he won them without a quality center in an otherwise center dominated era.

How could we be more like Mike? Well, for starters, start running your post ups through players who were great passers and ball handlers (limiting turnovers), who could also hit their FTs. Jordan was effectively a center without any of the weaknesses. Teams began to optimize and value their possessions using a dirty word called "analytics".

Patrick Ewing was a great center, but due to his offensive weaknesses he was never able to crack that elite tier. Building an offense around a player that can't dominate is and was folly... and this is Ewing we're talking about, a HoFer, not a scrub. Teams routinely gave post touches to bigs who weren't any good (even though they were often guarded by foul-prone players who likewise weren't very good).

All of the above is why teams began to favor PFs for their post play. Kevin Garnett, Tim Duncan, Dirk Nowitzki, even Chris Webber and Elton Brand came along and the post center went the way of the dinosaur.

-------

Now, as far as today's NBA, it is crucial for centers to operate on both ends of the pick and roll, which means footwork, hands, and quickness. Stiffs need not apply. Joakim Noah is a prime example of this.

Bill Russell wasn't an offensive focal point, yet he still lead his team to 11 championships doing all of this. Despite that, Wilt had sexy numbers and influenced the next 30 years of play. Yet there is no arguing which player was more successful in a team scheme (and if anything, I think I've shown modern centers are significantly more effective than what they did on average 20 years ago). NBA centers may not be "super stars" posting gaudy numbers as featured offensive players, but it was only a decade ago we were reading blurbs like "former all-star Jamaal Magloire, now playing for his 5th team".

# 75 Real2KInsider @ 09/10/15 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stillfeelme


	A large amount of centers with their lack of post scoring have mainly become space creators with pick and rolls and lob catchers. I would actually expect centers to be lower rated compared to greats for this reason alone.

Those players also played in a different rules era. What people often ignore when getting all wistful about the 80s/90s is that zone defenses were illegal, which made one-on-one play much more appealing. The zone's return as well as other rules changes (no more Shaq clearouts) put a major damper on post play.

OVR formula for the center position should subsequently be based on the current NBA, the one that actually exists. The primary function of the rating is to guide the AI with making personnel decisions and approximating player value. If the value is not replicating the value of the modern PF/C, then it is a hindrance to the game's modes, rather than an asset. There is a significant disconnect in player value if effective big men like Tyler Zeller or David Lee have an OVR only slightly better than NBA rookie guards.

Here's a fun example of why the OVR is so jacked

SF/PF/C value "Post Control" at a 30:1 OVR ratio.
PG/SG value it > 74:1 (meaning you can go 25-99 w/o seeing an OVR increase).

Ever wonder why your favorite 3 & D wing has a poor rating?
Conversely, take away Kobe/Wade/Jordan's post game and it wouldn't limit them as players?

The OVR formulas are archaic and re-adjusting a couple attribute scales is only making the problem worse, not better.

# 76 Jrocc23 @ 09/10/15 07:54 AM

Jodie Meeks screen is one of the best screens I've seen.

And I see y'all got him started again

# 77 BluFu @ 09/10/15 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rashidi


	SF formula is similar to SG and nothing like PF/C But sure try to correct me on something you don't know anything about

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rashidi


	SF/PF/C value "Post Control" at a 30:1 OVR ratio. PG/SG value it > 74:1 (meaning you can go 25-99 w/o seeing an OVR increase).

Of course, only Rashidi can partake in ratings discussions.

# 78 Real2KInsider @ 09/10/15 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevertheles109


	Rashidi, I appreciate the valuable information you provide to OS. Nevertheless, the reason your messages aren't heard as clearly as they are written is due to your snobbish/arrogant remarks when they are unnecessary. The bolded above is a clear example man. You attracts bees with honey, not vinegar.

Attracting bees has never been my intention, and never will be.

I do, however, have a strong aversion to "BS" which is why I'll make an off-hand comment to here and there, to an individual, when warranted.

# 79 Real2KInsider @ 09/10/15 08:19 AM

^Case in point

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluFu


	Of course, only Rashidi can partake in ratings discussions.

It's one attribute. Shall we compare the other 40?

There is a wee bit more to "partaking in discussion" than actively trolling or purporting fallacy.

# 80 Vni @ 09/10/15 08:41 AM

I like the dynamic Rashidi brings to a ratings discussion. Keep it up.

« Previous 1 2 345 6 7 Next »

More Links

NBA 2K16 Player Ratings & Screenshots - Day Five: Morrow, Johnson, Turner & More