Connect with us

NBA 2K19 Screenshot - Kemba Walker (Overall Rating - 86) Overrated, Underrated or Just Right?

NBA 2K19

NBA 2K19 Screenshot - Kemba Walker (Overall Rating - 86) Overrated, Underrated or Just Right?

2K released a new NBA 2K19 screenshot. This one featuring Kemba Walker, with an overall 86 rating. Let us know what you think.

Below are some of the other NBA 2K19 screenshots and player ratings that were recently released.

LeBron is the NBA 2K19 20th Anniversary Edition cover athlete releasing on September 7, while Giannis Antetokounmpo is cover athlete for the NBA 2K19 Standard Edition, releasing on September 11.

51 Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Discussion
  1. cjacks17
    This just reaffirms that I think Tatum, Mitchell and Simmons are too high.
    How?
    Assuming they might have Simmons as an actual PG this year, Kemba averaged like 22 and 5 apg. If he was a sg he'd probably be higher overall.
    Simmons averaged more assists and as a pg that counts more towards your rating as a pg right?
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    cjacks17
    This just reaffirms that I think Tatum, Mitchell and Simmons are too high.

    I don't have an issue with Simmons being higher than Kemba honestly. I could even kinda understand Mitchell. Tatum absolutely should not be. I could easily see Tatum passing him by this upcoming season but he was not playing at Kemba's level at this point in his career.
    HowDareI
    How?
    Assuming they might have Simmons as an actual PG this year, Kemba averaged like 22 and 5 apg. If he was a sg he'd probably be higher overall.
    Simmons averaged more assists and as a pg that counts more towards your rating as a pg right?
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

    I think you're putting to much emphasis on the stats. Horford is what, like 13/6 and he's a great player, he outplayed Embiid in the most recent series.
    Yeah...THAT Guy
    I don't have an issue with Simmons being higher than Kemba honestly. I could even kinda understand Mitchell. Tatum absolutely should not be. I could easily see Tatum passing him by this upcoming season but he was not playing at Kemba's level at this point in his career.

    Yh pretty much this.
    Yeah...THAT Guy
    I don't have an issue with Simmons being higher than Kemba honestly. I could even kinda understand Mitchell. Tatum absolutely should not be. I could easily see Tatum passing him by this upcoming season but he was not playing at Kemba's level at this point in his career.

    Simmons maybe not. I dont think Mitchell and I definitely dont think Tatum.
    I'm just hesitant with rookies. I remember everyone being fired up after Carter-Williams had a 16, 6 and 6 rookie season and then he started to fall off.
    That's why I thought the sophomores were too high.
    I would have went:
    Simmons: 86
    Mitchel: 84
    Tatum: 83
    The reality is that the ratings are dynamic now and change through the year, so it doesn't really matter that much, but that's just my opinion in regards to sophomore guys.
    Johnnythelegend
    I think you're putting to much emphasis on the stats. Horford is what, like 13/6 and he's a great player, he outplayed Embiid in the most recent series.
    I wouldn't really say he outplayed embiid at all. The Celtics locked down everyone besides him causing him to play more out of rhythm and more recklessly..but that's besides the point.
    Horford, Marc Gasol, etc...guys like that are just solid defenders with a nice jumper and mediocre post moves. They're not gonna ever go out and give you 30 and 20 and they're not gonna carry a team. They can't be rated too high because they're not franchise cornerstones just like Kemba.
    You can see the generational talent in Embiid, Simmons, Tatum even...Kemba is 27 or whatever and not gonna get much better. This is a good rating for a scoring pg.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    cjacks17
    Simmons maybe not. I dont think Mitchell and I definitely dont think Tatum.
    I'm just hesitant with rookies. I remember everyone being fired up after Carter-Williams had a 16, 6 and 6 rookie season and then he started to fall off.
    That's why I thought the sophomores were too high.
    I would have went:
    Simmons: 86
    Mitchel: 84
    Tatum: 83
    The reality is that the ratings are dynamic now and change through the year, so it doesn't really matter that much, but that's just my opinion in regards to sophomore guys.
    Mcw kinda never got a fair chance after he injured his shoulder and got traded, but like you said ratings change and regardless should reflect last seasons stats plus potential
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    HowDareI
    I wouldn't really say he outplayed embiid at all. The Celtics locked down everyone besides him causing him to play more out of rhythm and more recklessly..but that's besides the point.
    Horford, Marc Gasol, etc...guys like that are just solid defenders with a nice jumper and mediocre post moves. They're not gonna ever go out and give you 30 and 20 and they're not gonna carry a team. They can't be rated too high because they're not franchise cornerstones just like Kemba.
    You can see the generational talent in Embiid, Simmons, Tatum even...Kemba is 27 or whatever and not gonna get much better. This is a good rating for a scoring pg.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

    Wow, don't even know where to begin
    It’s funny to see people be so rattled up about ratings when they can be easily edited or changed once the season starts. These ratings/numbers are very subjective and don’t accurately represent how good a player is in real life.
    Johnnythelegend
    Wow, don't even know where to begin
    That's fine, I see what you're tryna do but bro I know basketball.
    Everyone has an opinion and i look at guys like Gasol and his numbers were never impressive for all the attention he gets.
    Reputation and solid defense can't be calculated but no one's gonna say horford is better than embiid because of a playoff series where he got numbers put up against him.
    Iggy won finals MVP for his defense on Bron but in no way is he close to him in a ratings scale.. Right?
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    HowDareI
    That's fine, I see what you're tryna do but bro I know basketball.
    Everyone has an opinion and i look at guys like Gasol and his numbers were never impressive for all the attention he gets.
    Reputation and solid defense can't be calculated but no one's gonna say horford is better than embiid because of a playoff series where he got numbers put up against him.
    Iggy won finals MVP for his defense on Bron but in no way is he close to him in a ratings scale.. Right?
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

    Right, but don't know why you included finals MVP into conversation, did Iggy outplay LeBron? No, if you switched their places Golden State would be a much better team.
    I don't think the same applies to Embiid Horford series. I think you are really underrating Horford, he's a better shooter than Embiid, better passer, a smarter player, partly due to experiance, something Embiid doesn't have yet. Horford is a great player and a huge part of the team that was a win away from being in the finals.
    Marc Gasol is a franchise player, I mean I am not sure what's the definition, but he was arguably the best player of a successful playoff team. Similar qualities to Horford, a great defender, passer, an outstanding bball iq, understanding of the game.
    The point is, you should look past the stats.
    tcnumba10
    It’s funny to see people be so rattled up about ratings when they can be easily edited or changed once the season starts. These ratings/numbers are very subjective and don’t accurate represent how good a player is in real life.

    I use to think the same way but I'm more understanding of the ratings complaints. The game comes out over a month before the season starts so if you are playing online or starting a franchise inaccurate ratings could be frustrating to deal with.
    Personally I'm more concerned with how players play and how they are being used. If I am playing the CPU are teams utilizing players appropriately? Are players performing accurately, for the most part? Take Ben Simmons for example. He could have have a 90+ rating as long as he's not taking and making shots he would take in real life, which is anything about 15+ out.
    Looks like they’re still working on the player models. These arms should’ve been on Kawhi.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    Johnnythelegend
    Right, but don't know why you included finals MVP into conversation, did Iggy outplay LeBron? No, if you switched their places Golden State would be a much better team.
    I don't think the same applies to Embiid Horford series. I think you are really underrating Horford, he's a better shooter than Embiid, better passer, a smarter player, partly due to experiance, something Embiid doesn't have yet. Horford is a great player and a huge part of the team that was a win away from being in the finals.
    Marc Gasol is a franchise player, I mean I am not sure what's the definition, but he was arguably the best player of a successful playoff team. Similar qualities to Horford, a great defender, passer, an outstanding bball iq, understanding of the game.
    The point is, you should look past the stats.
    Okay but it's a video game. And these guys shouldnt have high 80 ratings because all that translates to in game is a consistent 20 and 10 guy..which they aren't.
    Bro embiid averages 23 and 11...and plays defense too..his only knock is really the turnovers which is due to him being inexperienced in basketball as a whole..
    But not making excuses..
    Horford had like 13 and 7 this year and Gasol 18 and 8 I think...
    Rating them close to guys like embiid is not "looking past stats" regardless of how well they play defense or be franchise players. I'm sick of going online and seeing Gasol playing like shaq because of ratings.
    On topic, Kemba should be a scorer and that's it...if he's out here throwing passes like Steve Nash it's a problem...guys can't be playing out of their style because we have respect and wanna rate them too high.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    Johnnythelegend
    I think you're putting to much emphasis on the stats. Horford is what, like 13/6 and he's a great player, he outplayed Embiid in the most recent series.

    He's outplayed pretty much everyone in the East other than LeBron the past two seasons now.
    tcnumba10
    It’s funny to see people be so rattled up about ratings when they can be easily edited or changed once the season starts. These ratings/numbers are very subjective and don’t accurately represent how good a player is in real life.

    yeah me too i wonder whats the big deal with this thing why even become a long thread still buffles me. this people over reacts with rating.
    scottyp180
    I use to think the same way but I'm more understanding of the ratings complaints. The game comes out over a month before the season starts so if you are playing online or starting a franchise inaccurate ratings could be frustrating to deal with.
    Personally I'm more concerned with how players play and how they are being used. If I am playing the CPU are teams utilizing players appropriately? Are players performing accurately, for the most part? Take Ben Simmons for example. He could have have a 90+ rating as long as he's not taking and making shots he would take in real life, which is anything about 15+ out.

    But couldn't you say ratings are always going to be inaccurate? What I mean is first year players you dont know how good or bad they are going to be and 2nd year players you dont know if they are going to have that 2nd year slump or if they are going to get better or if a player has a great first year and people are really high but he never really gets better after. For example look at a guy like tyreke evans his first year he averaged 20.1 points, 5.3 rebounds and 5.8 assist. Very few players have averaged 20+ points, 5+ rebounds and 5+ assist in there first year and so ever one was talking about how good could he be but after his first year the most points he has averaged was last year at 19.4 and even had a few years at around 10-12 and has now been in the nba for 9 years and even his rebound numbers and assist numbers have mostly been down after that first year. Also with ratings being changed all the time during the season you could restart the season over and over again with a new roster if you wanted to and with ratings being changed all the time that means ratings can go down has a result of just a few games bad streak or up for a few games of a hot streak. So when is ratings than really accurate?
    Also look at a guy like KL we hardly saw him play last year but he got really high rating. What if he is not the same player this year or what if he starts the first few months rusty and than starts to look more like the old KL towards the end of the season? I agree about players playing like they should like you said with Simmons but what if Simmons worked on his shoot a lot this offseason and ends up being a ok shooter this year then that would mean he would be playing a lot different I mean back in his first like 1, 2 maybe 3 years or so LJ couldn't shoot at all either.
    HowDareI
    Okay but it's a video game. And these guys shouldnt have high 80 ratings because all that translates to in game is a consistent 20 and 10 guy..which they aren't.
    Bro embiid averages 23 and 11...and plays defense too..his only knock is really the turnovers which is due to him being inexperienced in basketball as a whole..
    But not making excuses..
    Horford had like 13 and 7 this year and Gasol 18 and 8 I think...
    Rating them close to guys like embiid is not "looking past stats" regardless of how well they play defense or be franchise players. I'm sick of going online and seeing Gasol playing like shaq because of ratings.
    On topic, Kemba should be a scorer and that's it...if he's out here throwing passes like Steve Nash it's a problem...guys can't be playing out of their style because we have respect and wanna rate them too high.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

    Problem is it's user controlled so he theoretically could be a pass first player all game long if the person controlling him wanted him to be. Can't just make it to where he's throwing the ball away every time to negate that.. 2K can never replicate a perfect rendition of reality. The user aspect will always be there.
    Smallville102001
    But couldn't you say ratings are always going to be inaccurate? What I mean is first year players you dont know how good or bad they are going to be and 2nd year players you dont know if they are going to have that 2nd year slump or if they are going to get better or if a player has a great first year and people are really high but he never really gets better after. For example look at a guy like tyreke evans his first year he averaged 20.1 points, 5.3 rebounds and 5.8 assist. Very few players have averaged 20+ points, 5+ rebounds and 5+ assist in there first year and so ever one was talking about how good could he be but after his first year the most points he has averaged was last year at 19.4 and even had a few years at around 10-12 and has now been in the nba for 9 years and even his rebound numbers and assist numbers have mostly been down after that first year. Also with ratings being changed all the time during the season you could restart the season over and over again with a new roster if you wanted to and with ratings being changed all the time that means ratings can go down has a result of just a few games bad streak or up for a few games of a hot streak. So when is ratings than really accurate?
    Also look at a guy like KL we hardly saw him play last year but he got really high rating. What if he is not the same player this year or what if he starts the first few months rusty and than starts to look more like the old KL towards the end of the season? I agree about players playing like they should like you said with Simmons but what if Simmons worked on his shoot a lot this offseason and ends up being a ok shooter this year then that would mean he would be playing a lot different I mean back in his first like 1, 2 maybe 3 years or so LJ couldn't shoot at all either.

    I think the issue is the overrated players based on something that hasn't been seen. For example, it would make more sense for guys like Simmons, Tatum, Mitchell to be rated how their performance left off last season and adjust based on how this season goes. Rather than jumping them up from the start just assuming they are going to be playing at a level we haven't saw from them yet.
    With Kawhi if he doesn't regain form they can lower him. No reason to make him a worse player by default when we don't know that he's not the same as he was.
    ojandpizza
    Problem is it's user controlled so he theoretically could be a pass first player all game long if the person controlling him wanted him to be. Can't just make it to where he's throwing the ball away every time to negate that.. 2K can never replicate a perfect rendition of reality. The user aspect will always be there.
    I know, but it was more of like just applying what I said about Gasol/horford to Kemba.
    If you wanna be pass first with him go ahead, but it shouldnt be as effective as pass first with Simmons.
    The post drop works as well with Gasol as it does with horford as it does Joel.
    The shimmy up and under works as well with Gasol as it does al and Joel...
    2k needs to not let that work...it's on them.
    If defense has horford at a 90 and embiid is a 90 but they play night and day...I'm cool...but I know that's not how it works in the game.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    HowDareI
    That's fine, I see what you're tryna do but bro I know basketball.
    Everyone has an opinion and i look at guys like Gasol and his numbers were never impressive for all the attention he gets.
    Reputation and solid defense can't be calculated but no one's gonna say horford is better than embiid because of a playoff series where he got numbers put up against him.
    Iggy won finals MVP for his defense on Bron but in no way is he close to him in a ratings scale.. Right?
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

    Horford is a tough player to quantify because his stats and his play don't exactly wow you the way Embiid can. He's the opposite of a flashy player, kind of like a lesser Tim Duncan. Since signing in Boston there's been a debate over whether or not Horford is worth the max contract. Some have given him the nickname of ""Average Al." He can be really quiet some games and at points throughout the season but the little things he does are huge for team success, evident in the playoffs. He's a sneaky good defender, very good screener, solid on the boards, good inside out game, and high basketball IQ. It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see him and Embiid with similar ratings because their intangibles are very different but they are both all-star talents.
    Another big thing with ratings comes down to player usage and the situation they are in. A player like Oladipo improved a ton within one season but part of that comes down to him going from a role player to the number 1 guy. Kevin Love went from being THE guy in Minnesota to a role player, and often forgotten piece, on the Cavs. Love didn't necessarily get worse he was just used much differently. Even a player like Tatum showed later in the season and in the playoffs how good he could be with a bigger role on offense. I think that makes it extremely tough to rate players.
    scottyp180
    Horford is a tough player to quantify because his stats and his play don't exactly wow you the way Embiid can. He's the opposite of a flashy player, kind of like a lesser Tim Duncan. Since signing in Boston there's been a debate over whether or not Horford is worth the max contract. Some have given him the nickname of ""Average Al." He can be really quiet some games and at points throughout the season but the little things he does are huge for team success, evident in the playoffs. He's a sneaky good defender, very good screener, solid on the boards, good inside out game, and high basketball IQ. It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see him and Embiid with similar ratings because their intangibles are very different but they are both all-star talents.
    Another big thing with ratings comes down to player usage and the situation they are in. A player like Oladipo improved a ton within one season but part of that comes down to him going from a role player to the number 1 guy. Kevin Love went from being THE guy in Minnesota to a role player, and often forgotten piece, on the Cavs. Love didn't necessarily get worse he was just used much differently. Even a player like Tatum showed later in the season and in the playoffs how good he could be with a bigger role on offense. I think that makes it extremely tough to rate players.
    This is true, but it also comes down to not overrating guys so they don't turn into Timmy when they aren't that.
    We have badges...which I thought was supposed to be like a compliment to ratings.
    I know as a sixer fan I shouldn't be, but I like the Celtics...Tatum is one of my favorite players...
    Horford should have gold or hall of fame defensive stopper, brick wall, pick and pop etc..
    But, he should be like an 85, 86 overall.
    But his badges can be there to reflect his abilities that don't translate to numbers.
    Same as Gasol.
    Every team has guys like that on the team. Sixers have Amir Johnson...didn't average anything really but he plays defense hustles and just knows where to be.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    HowDareI
    I wouldn't really say he outplayed embiid at all. The Celtics locked down everyone besides him causing him to play more out of rhythm and more recklessly..but that's besides the point.
    Horford, Marc Gasol, etc...guys like that are just solid defenders with a nice jumper and mediocre post moves. They're not gonna ever go out and give you 30 and 20 and they're not gonna carry a team. They can't be rated too high because they're not franchise cornerstones just like Kemba.
    You can see the generational talent in Embiid, Simmons, Tatum even...Kemba is 27 or whatever and not gonna get much better. This is a good rating for a scoring pg.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    Al Horford was THE reason the Celtics won that series in 5. He embarrassed Embiid.
    Exposed his conditioning and weaknesses on defense. Embiid was extremely inefficient in that series.
    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J727A using Operation Sports mobile app
    HowDareI
    I wouldn't really say he outplayed embiid at all. The Celtics locked down everyone besides him causing him to play more out of rhythm and more recklessly..but that's besides the point.
    Horford, Marc Gasol, etc...guys like that are just solid defenders with a nice jumper and mediocre post moves. They're not gonna ever go out and give you 30 and 20 and they're not gonna carry a team. They can't be rated too high because they're not franchise cornerstones just like Kemba.
    You can see the generational talent in Embiid, Simmons, Tatum even...Kemba is 27 or whatever and not gonna get much better. This is a good rating for a scoring pg.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

    As a fan of Embiid, you are severely underestimating Horford (and Gasol). Volume stats are good for determining who actually has the ability to be franchise players but don't let low volume stats skew your judgement on a player's skill level. If that was the case, then Westbrook would be considered the best PG ever.
    Horford probably has the most versatile skill set of any big in the league. He can shoot, pass, and defend better than most big men but because he's not looking out for his numbers, he gets criticized for it. He's definitely not the best and he's not better than Embiid, but he can compete with any of them.
    ojandpizza
    I think the issue is the overrated players based on something that hasn't been seen. For example, it would make more sense for guys like Simmons, Tatum, Mitchell to be rated how their performance left off last season and adjust based on how this season goes. Rather than jumping them up from the start just assuming they are going to be playing at a level we haven't saw from them yet.
    With Kawhi if he doesn't regain form they can lower him. No reason to make him a worse player by default when we don't know that he's not the same as he was.

    Another tricky thing, that I mention in my previous post, is players situations in regards to the team they play on. With the Celtics, for example, Irving and Hayward returning means players needing to take lesser roles and not being about to showcase their full potential and capabilities. And it could change on a given night depending who they play through or who has the hot hand. Hell it could change by the quarter. It's similar to the Warriors. It becomes difficult to accurately rate these players without underrating them or overvaluing them based on stats or certain performances
    Crossover1
    As a fan of Embiid, you are severely underestimating Horford (and Gasol). Volume stats are good for determining who actually has the ability to be franchise players but don't let low volume stats skew your judgement on a player's skill level. If that was the case, then Westbrook would be considered the best PG ever.
    Horford probably has the most versatile skill set of any big in the league. He can shoot, pass, and defend better than most big men but because he's not looking out for his numbers, he gets criticized for it. He's definitely not the best and he's not better than Embiid, but he can compete with any of them.
    I'm not tho, I watched them in the playoffs but it's not good balance to have a guy be a 90 overall because of his "potential" to put up numbers. All that means, is that in league simulations and pno games... he'll be dominant even tho that's not his mindset going into a game..
    Does that explain better?
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    Mauer4MVP
    Al Horford was THE reason the Celtics won that series in 5. He embarrassed Embiid.
    Exposed his conditioning and weaknesses on defense. Embiid was extremely inefficient in that series.
    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J727A using Operation Sports mobile app
    Bruhhh...no. lol come on.
    23 and 14 for Embiid, shooting like 43% which isn't good.
    Horford 15 and 8.5, he shot over 50 but other than that that was the only stat he really did anything better.
    You wanna talk about embarrassed it was Simmons offensively, and our wings defensively.
    Saric was playing horrid on defense, and for some reason we had JJ checking Tatum and that didn't work whatsoever.
    The Celtics played defense on everyone else and frustrated embiid by bringing soft doubles in the post. No one was shooting well and he had no reliable options to kick it to.
    Saying horford embarrassed him is just watching a few highlights of some good defensive possessions..but obviously averaging 23 and 14 isn't getting embarrassed at all.
    This is crazy off topic now but the series was won by Tatum and Smart. Rozier as well. Horford was there to hit shots others created for him and play defense with help by the guards.
    Which is why I keep saying he can't have a high rating because he's not going out there by himself to get it all done. He's older and it's not his game to do that.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    HowDareI
    I'm not tho, I watched them in the playoffs but it's not good balance to have a guy be a 90 overall because of his "potential" to put up numbers. All that means, is that in league simulations and pno games... he'll be dominant even tho that's not his mindset going into a game..
    Does that explain better?
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

    Yeah I agree but I don't think anyone's asking for Al to be rated similar to Embiid. He's right where he should be.
    HowDareI
    Bruhhh...no. lol come on.
    23 and 14 for Embiid, shooting like 43% which isn't good.
    Horford 15 and 8.5, he shot over 50 but other than that that was the only stat he really did anything better.
    You wanna talk about embarrassed it was Simmons offensively, and our wings defensively.
    Saric was playing horrid on defense, and for some reason we had JJ checking Tatum and that didn't work whatsoever.
    The Celtics played defense on everyone else and frustrated embiid by bringing soft doubles in the post. No one was shooting well and he had no reliable options to kick it to.
    Saying horford embarrassed him is just watching a few highlights of some good defensive possessions..but obviously averaging 23 and 14 isn't getting embarrassed at all.
    This is crazy off topic now but the series was won by Tatum and Smart. Rozier as well. Horford was there to hit shots others created for him and play defense with help by the guards.
    Which is why I keep saying he can't have a high rating because he's not going out there by himself to get it all done. He's older and it's not his game to do that.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    He did it on a .503 TS% compared to Horford's 629. To be clear, that's the difference between Terry Rozier and Steph Curry.
    And it was more than that. Horford consistently put Embiid out of position on defense and wore him down.
    If you want to just look at raw points and rebounds by all means.
    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J727A using Operation Sports mobile app
    HowDareI
    This is true, but it also comes down to not overrating guys so they don't turn into Timmy when they aren't that.
    We have badges...which I thought was supposed to be like a compliment to ratings.
    I know as a sixer fan I shouldn't be, but I like the Celtics...Tatum is one of my favorite players...
    Horford should have gold or hall of fame defensive stopper, brick wall, pick and pop etc..
    But, he should be like an 85, 86 overall.
    But his badges can be there to reflect his abilities that don't translate to numbers.
    Same as Gasol.
    Every team has guys like that on the team. Sixers have Amir Johnson...didn't average anything really but he plays defense hustles and just knows where to be.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

    Im a huge badge h8r so I'd like to discuss this point. What about them doesn't translate to numbers? What would the difference be between being an 85 with badges or an 88 if no badges existed? I feel like they just mess up gameplay and are more confusing when they should all just be ratings or not exist in the first place.
    Mauer4MVP
    He did it on a .503 TS% compared to Horford's 629. To be clear, that's the difference between Terry Rozier and Steph Curry.
    And it was more than that. Horford consistently put Embiid out of position on defense and wore him down.
    If you want to just look at raw points and rebounds by all means.
    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J727A using Operation Sports mobile app
    I use my eyes. I watched every second of every game.
    Simmons wasn't driving, wasn't being aggressive. JJ was spotty, Belinelli was MIA, ilyasova wasn't there, Covington gone...etc.
    When our whole offense is predicated on embiid and Simmons high pick and rolls or pops or embiid iso looking for shooters..it's hard when that equation equals no shooters or no threat to score from Simmons on the screens.
    If you look at advanced stats only and really try and say Horford played better than Jo, well that's an issue in and of itself.
    It's a team sport first, when you got guards reaching in and doubling on drives or post ups it's gonna be frustrating. Let's not forget the mask he was wearing, right. Or that his conditionong was horrible off that injury before the playoffs as well.
    The supporting cast being bad in the series allowing for the Celtics to key in on embiid and sag off shooters is a huge factor in turnovers and shooting percentage..and no advanced stats say that.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    triplechin
    Im a huge badge h8r so I'd like to discuss this point. What about them doesn't translate to numbers? What would the difference be between being an 85 with badges or an 88 if no badges existed? I feel like they just mess up gameplay and are more confusing when they should all just be ratings or not exist in the first place.
    I mean when they overcomplicate them like they kinda are now it does lead to somethings being overpowered or whatever.
    But badges to me were a perfect way to differentiate between players abilities not quantified by ratings.
    Easiest example: Lebron. Chasedown blocks.
    There are good shot blockers in the league, and they may have say a 90 block. But that doesn't necessarily make them a threat to chase you down.
    LeBron isn't a great shot blocker being a sf and not in the post, but that doesn't negate the fact that he's an elite defender from behind on a break.
    So I'm saying, guys like horford should have great badges. Good screener, good catch and shooter off screens, solid rebounder and defender...but he's not out here getting numbers.
    The badges supplement his ability as a player to play good in situations that don't attribute to numbers on a stat sheet.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    HowDareI
    This is true, but it also comes down to not overrating guys so they don't turn into Timmy when they aren't that.
    We have badges...which I thought was supposed to be like a compliment to ratings.
    I know as a sixer fan I shouldn't be, but I like the Celtics...Tatum is one of my favorite players...
    Horford should have gold or hall of fame defensive stopper, brick wall, pick and pop etc..
    But, he should be like an 85, 86 overall.
    But his badges can be there to reflect his abilities that don't translate to numbers.
    Same as Gasol.
    Every team has guys like that on the team. Sixers have Amir Johnson...didn't average anything really but he plays defense hustles and just knows where to be.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

    I could see Al being an 88 at most but that's just based on the ratings they've been handing out which have been high.
    Amir Johnson is a stiff. Dude is tall and that's about it. I hope you're not trying to say Johnson is similar to Horford and Gasol. Amir Johnson is more similar to an Aaron Baynes and even then Baynes offers more.
    And just to chime in on Horford's impact on the playoff series, I really think he was the leader and tone setter in that series for the Celtics. Whether he was the C's best player or won the series for Boston is debatable, it really was a collective team effort, but he was one of the most important pieces and you could make the argument the most important players considering the role he had to play and being the veteran on the team.
    scottyp180
    I could see Al being an 88 at most but that's just based on the ratings they've been handing out which have been high.
    Amir Johnson is a stiff. Dude is tall and that's about it. I hope you're not trying to say Johnson is similar to Horford and Gasol. Amir Johnson is more similar to an Aaron Baynes and even then Baynes offers more.
    And just to chime in on Horford's impact on the playoff series, I really think he was the leader and tone setter in that series for the Celtics. Whether he was the C's best player or won the series for Boston is debatable, it really was a collective team effort, but he was one of the most important pieces and you could make the argument the most important players considering the role he had to play and being the veteran on the team.
    I'm comparing his role as in, when he's out there he's just a veteran leader whos impact won't show up in a box score. He's just gonna play defense and grab some boards.
    As in his badges should be better than his ratings...setting screens and playing solid post d...but he's not gonna score or block people.
    But you're just really proving my point..horford can have like the leader badges defensive badges etc that make others around him better because he's a vet and smart but he shouldn't have some crazy overall which makes him play over his ability every game
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
    HowDareI
    I mean when they overcomplicate them like they kinda are now it does lead to somethings being overpowered or whatever.
    But badges to me were a perfect way to differentiate between players abilities not quantified by ratings.
    Easiest example: Lebron. Chasedown blocks.
    There are good shot blockers in the league, and they may have say a 90 block. But that doesn't necessarily make them a threat to chase you down.
    LeBron isn't a great shot blocker being a sf and not in the post, but that doesn't negate the fact that he's an elite defender from behind on a break.
    So I'm saying, guys like horford should have great badges. Good screener, good catch and shooter off screens, solid rebounder and defender...but he's not out here getting numbers.
    The badges supplement his ability as a player to play good in situations that don't attribute to numbers on a stat sheet.
    Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

    OK I'm with the chasedown example where that is more of a trait for a specific animation. It could be a rating but that might be easier to just keep as a badge. But being a good screener, for example, could be a rating.
    sva91
    Looks like they’re still working on the player models. These arms should’ve been on Kawhi.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    Looks damn accurate to me.
    Wow there's some passionate ratings people around.
    I don't see why all the fuss. Week 1 happens and it all changes. Then Kemba has 50 on opening night and he goes up again. Then Kawhi hits a half court game winner so now he's a 99.
    Meh.....ratings..... just play ball I say.
    On topic, muscle definition this year, good stuff.
    My rating changes for Kemba Walker from NBA 2K18
    Kemba Walker
    87 Overall (+2)

    Position: PG
    Archetype: Athletic Playmaker (from Offensive Star)
    OFFENSE
    79 Standing Layup (-8)
    85 Driving Layup (-2)
    60 Post Fade
    40 Post Hook (+12)
    40 Post Control (+5)
    75 Draw Foul
    74 Shot Close (-1)
    88 Open Shot Mid (+7)
    88 Contested Mid (+11)
    88 Off-Dribble Mid (+10)
    85 Open Shot 3pt (+2)
    85 Contested 3pt (+3)
    85 Off-Dribble 3pt (+3)
    86 Free Throw (+2)
    90 Ball Control (+2)
    74 Pass Vision (+1)
    85 Pass IQ (-3)
    85 Pass Accuracy (-2)
    31 Offensive Rebound
    25 Standing Dunk
    25 Driving Dunk (-5)
    25 Contact Dunk
    99 Shot IQ (+2)
    90 Hands (+2)
    DEFENSE
    47 Defensive Rebound (+1)
    42 Block
    70 Shot Contest (-5)
    67 Steal (+5)
    70 On-Ball Defense (-5)
    55 Low Post Defense (+23)
    75 Reaction Time
    ATHLETICISM
    45 Boxout (-5)
    75 Lateral Quickness
    90 Speed (+7)
    90 Ball Speed (-2)
    90 Acceleration (+2)
    80 Vertical (-1)
    50 Strength
    95 Stamina (+2)
    90 Hustle
    90 Durability (+5)
    INTANGIBLES
    75 Pass Perception (-2)
    60 Defensive Consistency
    70 Pick & Roll Defense (-8)
    65 Help Defense (-7)
    99 Offensive Consistency (+9) - Compare to Simmons/Mitchell/Tatum
    90 Intangibles (-5)
    90 Potential (+3)
    GRADES
    Inside Scoring: B (from B+)
    Mid-Range Scoring: A (from B)
    3PT Scoring: A (from B+)
    Playmaking: A-
    Perimeter Defense: C+
    Post Defense: D+ (from D-)
    Rebounding: D
    Athleticism: B (from B-)
    Basketball IQ: A-
    STRENGTHS
    As Walker gets older his ability to finish around the basket area is beginning to wane - he makes up for it with deadeye shooting off the pick & roll (92nd percentile).
    WEAKNESSES
    A scorer first and a passer second, which reflects in his assist numbers. Walker's size and effort are a factor in the Hornets' defensive decline over the last two seasons. A poor man's Kyrie Irving =/= on par with Kyrie Irving.
    Rashidi Ratings vs 2K19 for comparison
    96 Kawhi Leonard (+2)
    89 DeMar DeRozan (NC)
    87 Kemba Walker (+1)
    86 Ben Simmons (-1)
    86 Donovan Mitchell (-1)
    85 Jayson Tatum (-2)
    Screenshot is pretty spot on muscle definition and player model looks much improved not so sure about the rating 86 maybe could've been a point higher Only screenshot i haven't been happy with is the anorexic Donovan Mitchell he needs a new player model like Asap! 
    This rating is underrated. Kemba NEVER gets the credit he deserves because he plays for Charlotte, a small market team. There isn’t a team that wouldn’t love to have Kemba... way to screw up 2K. Already...
    ?Serious question. Did 2k forget about the "historical" rating scale aka how all players including legends were rated on the same scale? I don't have an issue with Kemba's rating, but some others (Tatum and Mitchell) to start make no sense and I'm pretty sure they will be coming down early in the season but I'm wondering what the process of deciding the ratings is.
    GuwopGeezus
    ?Serious question. Did 2k forget about the "historical" rating scale aka how all players including legends were rated on the same scale? I don't have an issue with Kemba's rating, but some others (Tatum and Mitchell) to start make no sense and I'm pretty sure they will be coming down early in the season but I'm wondering what the process of deciding the ratings is.

    All the "historical rating scale" is at this point is 2k's stinginess in handing out a 99 rating in any given attribute.
    Mikelopedia
    All the "historical rating scale" is at this point is 2k's stinginess in handing out a 99 rating in any given attribute.

    The ironic thing is they give out 98's like gangbusters, as if there's some intrinsic difference. It was a marketing ploy and nothing more.
    Rashidi
    The ironic thing is they give out 98's like gangbusters, as if there's some intrinsic difference. It was a marketing ploy and nothing more.

    Just curious, is your LeBron rating 99 or 98? Dont think you've posted his.
    Rashidi
    The ironic thing is they give out 98's like gangbusters, as if there's some intrinsic difference. It was a marketing ploy and nothing more.

    The one that makes me chuckle the most is all the 98 shot IQ's.
Continue Reading

More in NBA 2K19

Trending


Related

To Top