Players that need to be re rated

[Neon1]

[quote=Rashidi;2038902245]

Quote: Originally Posted by Neon1

It's a good thing I don't edit that way. I find it amusing when people throw this "volume shooter" term around. Whether I take 100 open shots or 5 does not matter. The point is I am taking open shots. "High Usage" players take more contested shots than their low usage bretheren. You use Crawford in D'Antoni's system as an example, yet DA's system is proven to get players more open shots rather than contested shots, and then you are regarding Crawford as a volume shooter by his attempts which are inflated due to the game pace and style of play. In this instance, what does his career have to do with this year? The point is he is a much better 3pt shooter NOW than he was in the first four years. He hit four threes last night and he ain't gonna do that rated like he's a 26% shooter.

Thats why you dont understand. It DOES MATTER how many he has taken. I can go out on a court right now and only give me 11 shots, I might go 4-11, 6-11 , or 2-11 on any given day because , i (like many players, pro or otherwise) am not a consistant shooter. It goes in peaks and valleys using a sample size as tiny as 11 only gives you time for either a peak or a valey, not both.

JJ Redick is 0-10 in 46 minutes. Do you think if you lined both Marvin Williams and JJ Redick up at the three point line and told them to fire up 100 threes Marvin would hit 72-73 of them compared to 0 for Redick? Not a chance in hell.

On the game it is the same way peaks and valleys hot and cold streaks. High Tide and Low tide, But at the end of the day water always settles back to sea level.

Bro he has only shot ELEVEN 3PT ATTEMPTS. 11 all year. You cant rate like that. That is like rating Dwight Howard as a 64% free throw shooter for the whole year just because he might have went 7-11 from the stripe his first game of the season.

He is attempting 2.77 3pts a game per48 now which is way up from the little he attempted previous so even one night boosts his rating.

Yesterday he was a 25.2% career now he is already a 27.7%career 3pt shooter. Add his 2.77 attempts per48 this year and hes a 65 on my scale or 75 on 2K9's scale.

And yes he can still take and/or make 4 threes during a given game if you leave him open at that rating.

You put too much stake into the actual rating and not near enough time understanding the tendancies.

Tendancies make the game. I can LOWER attribute ratings and BOOST on court production. You dont have to just jack up every rating when u understand what tendancies make a player do what.

Having a player like Marvin Williams rating crazy boosted because he has hit a few in a row (who only attempts 1.8 3's a game). Him raining threes on people all night long on this game is as unrealistic as it gets, while in reality he takes a three either makes one it or misses it then calls it a night on the long ball.

Its almost as bad as having players rated 99, which means its straight up impossible for anyone to ever be "better" than that player. Like Ever. For like the rest of time.

[Neon1]

Quote: Originally Posted by stizz

Yeah, I'd like to try them out.

Search for "Stizz Demo". Its only Magic and Hornets. Completley overhauled rating and tendency system based on statistics and statistical tendencies.

It runs on a lower scale than 2k uses so dont freak out when you see Chris Paul at a 86, Howard at 88 (those will end up being two of the highest ratings in the game when its done) Kobe and LBJ usually come out around a 90-91 rating for tops.

Overall rating doesnt variate much from player to player.

Most stars usually come out around 80.

Most all NBA types usually end up in High 80's to low 90's.


You can watch it CPU vs CPU on HOF to best see how the gameplay works.

Then when you play you may need to go one difficulty lower than you usually play at due to lower ratings making the need for open shots important.

[Rashidi]

[quote=Neon1;2038902455]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rashidi

Thats why you dont understand. It DOES MATTER how many he has taken. I can go out on a court right now and only give me 11 shots, I might go 4-11, 6-11 , or 2-11 on any given day because , i (like many players, pro or otherwise) am not a consistant shooter. It goes in peaks and valleys using a sample size as tiny as 11 only gives you time for either a peak or a valey, not both.

Bro. He is 8-11 through 6 games after going 1-10 in 82 games last year.

Quote:

Do you think if you lined both Marvin Williams and JJ Redick up at the three point line and told them to fire up 100 threes Marvin would hit 72-73 of them compared to 0 for Redick? Not a chance in hell.

Here's the funny part - you seem to be implying that Williams wouldn't even be close to Redick. Williams was the #2 mid-range shooter in the entire league last season. He has now extended his range to the 3pt line. The 3pt numbers Williams has put up in the past are MEANINGLESS because he has improved as a player and you can measure this without game statistics.

Redick on the other hand, has yet to significantly improve any part of his game since entering the league, including his 3pt shot.

He may not be a 40% 3pt shooter (but then again, he might be). The point he's surely going to be above 30% for the year, so what sense is there on rating him by career numbers, when most of his career threes were when he was a 19/20 year old?. There is probably a decent chance he even shoots a higher percentage than Redick.

Quote:

On the game it is the same way peaks and valleys hot and cold streaks. High Tide and Low tide, But at the end of the day water always settles back to sea level.

I don't think anyone is advocating Marvin Williams have a 99 3pt rating because he's hit 70% of them through the season's first three weeks, if that's what you're trying to get at. If you want my analogy, the sun has set and a new day has dawned.

Quote:

That is like rating Dwight Howard as a 64% free throw shooter for the whole year just because he might have went 7-11 from the stripe his first game of the season.

Really. Because 7-11 vs 6-11 has soooo much in common with 1-10 (82gms) vs 8-11 (6gms). I'm not a math major but come on.

Quote:

Yesterday he was a 25.2% career now he is already a 27.7%career 3pt shooter. Add his 2.77 attempts per48 this year and hes a 65 on my scale or 75 on 2K9's scale.

So basically what you're saying is you plan on having him underrated for about half of the season. Ok.

Quote:

And yes he can still take and/or make 4 threes during a given game if you leave him open at that rating.

Would he go 4-4? How many 65 3pt shooters have you gone 8-11 with?

Quote:

You put too much stake into the actual rating and not near enough time understanding the tendancies.

Oh right, because you know my ratings/tendencies and how I formulate them so well.

Quote:

Having a player like Marvin Williams rating crazy boosted because he has hit a few in a row (who only attempts 1.8 3's a game).

I've been rating for 7 years and you're lecturing me on sample size. Seriously? What is "crazy boosted"? There's no reason to give Marvin something like an 85 unless he continues shooting at this pace. The difference between us is you'd still be holding Marvin's history against him.

Quote:

Its almost as bad as having players rated 99, which means its straight up impossible for anyone to ever be "better" than that player. Like Ever. For like the rest of time.

...Until that player gets worse. Or until a player comes along with a 100+ rating like LeBron or Kobe. 99 overall does not give you a perfect player. LeBron can't shoot at all, he's only an average defender, and he's still 100 overall.

[t_h_e_growth]

^ LeBron is way better than an "average" defender.

unfortunately most of the time he cant focus on that because he has to lead the team in every category for them to win lol....

but trust me, if Bron's main responsibility was to lock someone down, he would be a helluva defender..... and he also makes sensational blocks every game.....

[Rashidi]

Quote: Originally Posted by t_h_e_growth

^ LeBron is way better than an "average" defender.

Completely irrelevant. The point is he's not Ron Artest, Josh Smith, Andrei Kirilenko, etc on defense. He is a 100 rating and still has room for growth as a player.

[Tomba]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rashidi

Completely irrelevant. The point is he's not Ron Artest, Josh Smith, Andrei Kirilenko, etc on defense. He is a 100 rating and still has room for growth as a player.

true

[Neon1]

[quote=Rashidi;2038906393]

Quote: Originally Posted by Neon1

Bro. He is 8-11 through 6 games after going 1-10 in 82 games last year. Here's the funny part - you seem to be implying that Williams wouldn't even be close to Redick. Williams was the #2 mid-range shooter in the entire league last season. He has now extended his range to the 3pt line. The 3pt numbers Williams has put up in the past are MEANINGLESS because he has improved as a player and you can measure this without game statistics.

Where the heck did you get that from? Are we both talking about MARVIN Williams? Cause MARVIN Williams shot 40.8% on his jumpers. Thats not even #2 on his own team let alone the entire league.

Quote:

Redick on the other hand, has yet to significantly improve any part of his game since entering the league, including his 3pt shot. He may not be a 40% 3pt shooter (but then again, he might be). The point he's surely going to be above 30% for the year, so what sense is there on rating him by career numbers, when most of his career threes were when he was a 19/20 year old?. There is probably a decent chance he even shoots a higher percentage than Redick.

Look im not hating on Marvin's game or saying that he hasnt improved, his game or his 3pt shot. All im saying is that its crazy to jump the gun over only 11 shots.

That is nowhere near enough attempts to get a good gauge on hom much it has actually improved.

He is 60% (12-20) this year through 10 games (including preseason). He has obviously improved and will be over 30% when its said and done. He wasnt as bad a shooter as his % last yr and he isnt as good a shooter as his % this year. The true Marvin when the water settles is some where inbetween last year and this year.

13-30 .433 or less. And its very likely much less. He could be rated a 81 at most going by this theory (43.3%+2.77att+35), which is what id do as of today if i was making rosters for anyone else besides myself. But more than likely it will be coming down sooner than later.

What my point is is that you have to take proof of a pattern into account. 11 or 20 shots is not close to enough to establish that, its far too small, any make or miss changes your rating entirely at that small a sample size. If he goes 0-2 tonight, He drops a full 5 points in rating depending if you are going strictly by his percentage.

If he misses only 3 in a row..he drops a full 8. Thats insane.

My thing is that well known/used or whatever roster editors have 1000's of people using your rosters to start associations with, what happens when Marvin misses three in a row and they still have some insanely overated 3pt shooter Marvin Williams to play with/against?

Quote:

Really. Because 7-11 vs 6-11 has soooo much in common with 1-10 (82gms) vs 8-11 (6gms). I'm not a math major but come on.

Where do the amount of games come into play? 11 shots are 11 shots nomatter how long a gap there is beween those shots.

I mean i add frequency into the equation but youve already said that in your mind frequency (quantity) of shots shouldnt play a part. I just dont get where you are going with that unless you are agreeing with my point about volume shooters.

Quote:

So basically what you're saying is you plan on having him underrated for about half of the season. Ok.

That is not my plan. Personally my plan is not to rush or overeact with ratings that are so small in size that they can litterally change a giant 10-15 points overnight or two which is exactly what happens if Marvin goes 1-4. Which is VERY possible for ANY player to do.

So my plan is to actually either wait until there is enough data to find the players new sea level. Taking a player from 60's to Mid 80's or 90's is way too drastic a change if people are using those as bases for association play.

Quote:

Would he go 4-4? How many 65 3pt shooters have you gone 8-11 with?

It was a given night. Just because somebody does something one time doesnt mean it should be taken as a regular thing. Like i said you cant come to a conclusion on some only looking at one small stretch. Good and bad happens all the time in small doses. Players do this all the time, good and bad shooters go though streaks where they cant buy a bucket and also go through streaks where they could make shots if they had a blindfold on.

Hell Rashard Lewis is doing it right now. Ive seen him go a few games where he went things like 15-25 combined from three and ive seem him shoot 1 or 2 of his last 15. Is he either of those things? No.

Quote:

Oh right, because you know my ratings/tendencies and how I formulate them so well.

I have no clue how you come to lots of your ratings, all i know is that you have basically said more than once that you dont see using statistics as a way to do ratings. Which makes me take the position that you see your own opinion holding more weight than what the proof (stats) says.

Yes stats can be misleading if you go strictly by them without knowing what to read and not read into, but at the end of the day stats are the paper trail of player tendencies or of any tendencies for that matter.

Quote:

I've been rating for 7 years and you're lecturing me on sample size. Seriously? What is "crazy boosted"? There's no reason to give Marvin something like an 85 unless he continues shooting at this pace. The difference between us is you'd still be holding Marvin's history against him.

Well actually lots of people have been doing it as long and/or put as many man hours into their ratings as you might do on a daily basis.

Just because you are the the first one or the only guy that went out of the way or cared enough to commercialize himself to help the people with 2k's jacked up ratings over the years doesnt mean that nobody else was doing ratings. Its just that nobody else gave a rats *** to take that much time writing all that info down.

Props to you for doing that for people, but dont mistake popularity for meaning the best, like that display you put on at the end of 2k8 with the whole overdone "im retiring until somebody can challenge me, nobody can touch the king" bit.

Well 2k Share came about and when people saw previously unknown cats like Nogster etc, It showed people that you werent even the best maker on OS. He brought you out of retirement real quick when homey got all that deserved love. Im just sayin. Lets be real about it. I mean your rosters were the **** until the tendencies came into play, then personally i think thats where you got overtaken. But tendencies are all about the math, and basically you used to say back in the day that you never really believed basing edits off the math works.

Quote:

...Until that player gets worse. Or until a player comes along with a 100+ rating like LeBron or Kobe. 99 overall does not give you a perfect player. LeBron can't shoot at all, he's only an average defender, and he's still 100 overall.

Its just way to high a scale, Cheese city. Even if your using a scale that high and taking LBJ, Kobe, Paul aside, there is just still far too much seperation in overall from player to player.

Lots of time the seperation between players in 2k rosters and yours (which i feel use the close to the same scale) is too big a gap for a player to naturaly progress into overtaking that players spot in the lineup during a season, which happens in real life all the time because in actuality there usually arent HUGE gaps between overall talent levels from player to player.

Theres usually only small differences in actual skills. How the players skillset fits and/or doesnt fit into a given coaches system is what put players on the court.

In real life its the players tendencies (or mindset/mentality/habits) that makes the difference between a scrub/role player/starter and or star on court. Tendencies are what makes a player a player.