2K9 Team Ratings, by Rashidi

[Rashidi]

Before I get into this, one of the problems I've had with the ratings is the team ratings are often messed up somehow, seemingly to faulty coding.

Celtics have 80/91 Off/Def with 83 overall rating while Pistons are 74/87 (-6/-4) yet have an 84 overall rating.

I thought of a fairly simple way to rectify this. Just average offense/defense together. I did this and the rankings came out very realistically.

EAST
Celtics 80 Offense, 91 Defense, 83 Overall (85.5)
Raptors 86 Offense, 78 Defense, 83 Overall (82.0)
Pistons 74 Offense, 87 Defense, 84 Overall (80.5)
76ers 64 Offense, 88 Defense, 76 Overall (76.0)
Wizards 81 Offense, 71 Defense, 74 Overall (76.0)
Magic 77 Offense, 71 Defense, 73 Overall (74.0)
Bobcats 64 Offense, 81 Defense, 67 Overall (72.5)
Hawks 68 Offense,74 Defense, 71 Overall (71.0)
Cavaliers 53 Offense, 86 Defense, 60 Overall (69.5)
Bucks 74 Offense, 60 Defense, 65 Overall (67.0)
Heat 63 Offense, 69 Defense, 64 Overall (66.0)
Bulls 57 Offense, 74 Defense, 72 Overall (65.5)
Knicks 76 Offense, 55 Defense, 61 Overall (65.5)
Nets 63 Offense, 66 Defense, 64 Overall (64.5)
Pacers 63 Offense, 61 Defense, 63 Overall (62.0)

WEST
Lakers 84 Offense, 87 Defense, 85 Overall (85.5)
Rockets 83 Offense, 86 Defense, 85 Overall (84.5)
Mavericks 86 Offense, 82 Defense, 85 Overall (84.0)
Jazz 82 Offense, 84 Defense, 82 Overall (83.0)
Suns 95 Offense, 70 Defense, 90 Overall (82.5)
Spurs 68 Offense, 95 Defense, 92 Overall (81.5)
Hornets 81 Offense, 79 Defense, 80 Overall (80.0)
Nuggets 73 Offense, 75 Defense, 75 Overall (74.0)
Clippers 60 Offense, 80 Defense, 70 Overall (70.0)
Blazers 64 Offense, 73 Defense, 68 Overall (68.5)
Warriors 66 Offense, 68 Defense, 67 Overall (67.0)
T’Wolves 73 Offense, 57 Defense, 72 Overall (65.0)
Grizzlies 55 Offense, 69 Defense, 59 Overall (62.0)
Thunder 59 Offense, 63 Defense, 61 Overall (61.0)
Kings 55 Offense, 61 Defense, 59 Overall (58.0)

It has really annoyed me that no matter what I do to the Spurs or Suns they are always rated in the 90s. This shows that they are not at the top of the league. As you can see, some teams have a perfect average (Hornets: 81/79 = 80; Clippers 60/80 = 70; Nuggets 73/75 = 74; etc) while the game seems to just boost Spurs/Suns for god knows whatever reason.

This method shows the Celtics and Lakers are the two top teams in the league. (For whatever reason, Celtics only have 7th highest overall rating despite 3 all-stars). Lakers are their equal thanks to a healthy Bynum. The Rockets with their 3 stars are right behind them as they should be. All these teams trail the Suns/Spurs by 5+ overall but it should be clear who the superior teams are.

[mr NEW JERZ]

damn i cant believe you actually wrote all that!:eek:
hows your fingers doing ?

[J-H!zZl3]

Rashidi you think that the Lakers have better defense than offense? Im a Laker fan and all, but their offense is better than their D. I think a 87 for defense is kind of high IMO.

[Rashidi]

Breaking down their starting lineups (with my ratings)

Overall rating of average starter
PG 84
SG 84
SF 83
PF 84
C 82

WESTERN CONFERENCE
+4 above average starters (i.e. all-stars) in bold

Blazers
Blake 78 (-6), Roy 89 (+5), Webster 75 (-8), Aldridge 83 (-1), Oden 81 (-1)

Clippers
Davis 90 (+6), Mobley 78 (-6), Davis 82 (-1), Thomas 76 (-8), Kaman 86 (+4)

Grizzlies
Conley 78 (-6), Mayo 82 (-2), *** 84 (+1), Warrick (-4), Milicic 73 (-9)

Hornets
Paul 97 (+13), Peterson 78 (-6), Stojakovic 82 (-1), West 90 (+6), Chandler 85 (+3)

Jazz
Williams 93 (+9), Brewer 78 (-6), Kirilenko 83 (+0), Boozer 92 (+8), Okur 82 (+0)

Kings
Udrih 77 (-7), Martin 84 (+0), Garcia 79 (-4), Moore 75 (-8), Miller 81 (-1)

Lakers
Fisher 78 (-6), Bryant 98 (+14), Odom 85 (+2), Gasol 90 (+6), Bynum 85 (+3)

Mavericks
Kidd 90 (+6), Terry 86 (+2), Howard 86 (+3), Nowitzki 95 (+11), Dampier 79 (-3)

Nuggets
Carter 75 (-9), Iverson 92 (+8), Anthony 92 (+8), Martin 78 (-6), Nene 80 (-2)

Rockets
Alston 81 (-3), McGrady 94 (+10), Artest 88 (+5), Scola 80 (-4), Yao 92 (+10)

Spurs
Parker 90 (+6), Ginobili 90 (+6), Bowen 80 (-3), Duncan 98 (+14), Thomas 80 (-2)

Suns
Nash 95 (+11), Bell 80 (-4), Barnes 76 (-7), Stoudemire 94 (+10), O'Neal 84 (+2)

Thunder
Watson 82 (-2), Durant 81 (-3), Green 77 (-6), Wilcox 80 (-4), Collison 81 (+0)

T'Wolves
Foye 78 (-6), Miller 80 (-4), Gomes 80 (-3), Love 80 (-4), Jefferson 89 (+7)

Warriors
Williams 74 (-10), Ellis 84 (+0), Maggette 83 (+0), Harrington (-4), Biedrins 80 (-2)

[blingballa333]

Great post Rashidi, good to see you back posting. Well I totally agree, I too have noticed that the ratings are very inconsistent. I hope they fix this in next years version. I was wondering if you are going to be doing maunual roster updates through the 2kshare feature this year?

[thesniper321]

thank you..............

[Rashidi]

Rashidi you think that the Lakers have better defense than offense? Im a Laker fan and all, but their offense is better than their D. I think a 87 for defense is kind of high IMO.

No, the game engine thinks that.

For what it's worth, the Lakers offensive rating 3rd in the west, and 4th in the league (Suns 95, Mavs 86, Pistons 86, Lakers 84). Their defense is 2nd in the west, tied for 4th in the league (Spurs 95, Celtics 91, Sixers 88, Lakers/Pistons 87

Bynum and Gasol make for a formidable defensive line, and they have an all-defensive player in their backcourt too. No, not Derek Fisher.

[HOLLAM]

Lakers were the best offensive team last season (considering their PPG and FG% combination).. w/o having their 2nd and 3rd best players (bynum & gasol) for the majority of the season.


With that said, why in the holy mother of F*** did u give my lakers an 84 in offense...? i dont care what kind of stupid excuse u got for that idiotism... the Lakers should have around 90+ offense... did u consider the particular plays ran, tempo and fastbreaks into your stupid little breakdown..?


No.


GTFO... and u have the nerve to give my team 87 in defense....


u dont know S***


(and no i am not offended, i just felt the strong urge to pwn somebody)

[blingballa333]

Wow, Hollam,with that comment you really should just print the word IDIOT right across your forehead.

[Rashidi]

Before it falls off the first page

EASTERN CONFERENCE

Overall rating of average starter
PG 84
SG 84
SF 83
PF 84
C 82

Sixers
Miller 85 (+1), Iguodala 86 (+2), Young 74 (-9), Brand 92 (+8), Dalembert 83 (+1)

Bobcats
Felton 82 (-2), Richardson 84 (+0), Wallace 85 (+2), May 80 (-4), Okafor 86 (+4)

Bucks
Ridnour 80 (-4), Redd 85 (+1), Jefferson 84 (+1), Villanueva 79 (-5), Bogut 82 (+0)

Bulls
Hinrich 84 (+0), Hughes 81 (-3), Deng 84 (+1), Gooden 80 (-4), Noah 76 (-6)

Cavaliers
Williams 84 (+0), Pavlovic 74 (-10), James 97 (+13), Wallace 79 (-5), Ilgauskas 86 (+4)

Celtics
Rondo 82 (-2), Allen 88 (+4), Pierce 91 (+8), Garnett 98 (+14), Perkins 77 (-5)

Hawks
Bibby 83 (-1), Johnson 88 (+4), Williams 80 (-3), Smith 86 (+2), Horford 83 (+1)

Heat
Quinn 73 (-11), Wade 95 (+11), Marion 84 (+1), Beasley 83 (-1), Blount 76 (-6)

Knicks
Marbury 81 (-3), Crawford 83 (-1), Richardson 76 (-7), Randolph 87 (+3), Curry 78 (-4)

Magic
Nelson 81 (-3), Bogans 74 (-10), Turkoglu 84 (+1), Lewis 83 (-1), Howard 93 (+11)

Nets
Harris 84 (+0), Carter 89 (+5), Simmons 77 (-6), Yi 76 (-8), Lopez 78 (-4)

Pacers
Ford 85 (+1), Dunleavy 83 (-1), Granger 83 (+0), Murphy 79 (-5), Nesterovic 78 (-4)

Pistons
Billups 91 (+7), Hamilton 87 (+3), Prince 84 (+1), McDyess 83 (-1), Wallace 87 (+5)

Raptors
Calderon 86 (+2), Parker 83 (-1), Moon 79 (-4), Bosh 92 (+8), O'Neal 89 (+7)

Wizards
Arenas 94 (+10), Stevenson 78 (-6), Butler 90 (+7), Jamison 87 (+3), Haywood 79 (-3)

[IVODEM]

Can't wait to play with my Jazz :D

[Rashidi]

(and no i am not offended, i just felt the strong urge to pwn somebody)

And in doing so, you only pwned yourself.

The very first line written in topic, for your viewing pleasure

Before I get into this, one of the problems I've had with the ratings is the team ratings are often messed up somehow, seemingly to faulty coding.

I am well aware of how good the Lakers are offensively. FORTUNATELY, I judge things by more than a primitive stat like "ppg", else the Warriors would have just a slightly higher offensive rating than 60. One would hope you read the part where it's impossible to get Phoenix's offensive rating to go down. Sadly, it doesn't seem like you were bright enough to read the entire post before getting all emotional (I know your hormones are raging and you're probably ****ed that junior high school is just around the corner, but please don't take it out on little old me).

Anyway, I'm in a good mood, so you get off light. Hope you enjoyed your pwn more than I did.

[ballerblok]

lakers better D than rockets ?? bs...

[AgentTurner0]

yo u mean 2 tell me that the bobcats are better than the cavs???

and how are the hornets lower than all those teams who didnt make offseason moves and the hornets made 2 good additions in posey and devin brown come on now man

[Rashidi]

lakers better D than rockets ?? bs...

Hooray for reading comprehension!

Anyway
By Def Awareness
Lakers: Fisher 80, Bryant 92, Odom 80, Gasol 82, Bynum 79
Rockets: Alston 81, McGrady 84, Artest 95, Scola 68, Yao 82

Replace Scola with Chuck Hayes (86) and the team rates 91 Defensively
Replace Scola with Shane Battier (90) and the team rates 98 Defensively

Liek OMG bs!

[alsolidus]

i can agree with most everything here except Chris Paul 97 and D-wade a 95 :(

no way Chris Paul has a higher overall then D-wade

[NorcalBalla23]

i can agree with most everything here except Chris Paul 97 and D-wade a 95 :(

no way Chris Paul has a higher overall then D-wade

In nba 2k9 he should be. Its like saying steve francis should still be an 80. When he hasnt done ****.

[Rashidi]

yo u mean 2 tell me that the bobcats are better than the cavs???

Hooray for more people who can't read bolded type!

Big Ben and Varejao destroy Cleveland's rating thanks to their offensive ineptitude. If you bench both, take them both out of the rotation, and start Wally Szczerbiak at PF, Cleveland has 74/77 Off/Def and a 75 overall rating. Don't ***** at me because of 2k's messed up coding.

And the Bobcats are a decent 8th seed quality team when healthy. Their main problem is Sean May has missed the last two years, and Gerald Wallace is good to miss 30 games a year. They have a thin bench and are obviously a worse team with Matt Carroll and Nazr Mohammed starting games.

and how are the hornets lower than all those teams who didnt make offseason moves and the hornets made 2 good additions in posey and devin brown come on now man

If you're counting Devin Brown as a good addition, that pretty much justifies their ranking.

They replaced Jannero Pargo with James Posey. Big whoop. They're still the same team.

[thesniper321]

francis will be 82

[blingballa333]

Rashidi, dont mind replying to those fools lol. They will never understand even if you say it right to their face. The only beef i have with my Blazers player ratings is that martell, should be around a 78.

[NorcalBalla23]

francis will be 82

Na he wont. Lol.

[defensiveminded]

Why are the 76ers and Clippers so low on offense ??

[defensiveminded]

i can agree with most everything here except Chris Paul 97 and D-wade a 95 :(

no way Chris Paul has a higher overall then D-wade
u serious ??? CP is way better then wade

[mffl_41]

Before I get into this, one of the problems I've had with the ratings is the team ratings are often messed up somehow, seemingly to faulty coding.

Celtics have 80/91 Off/Def with 83 overall rating while Pistons are 74/87 (-6/-4) yet have an 84 overall rating.

I thought of a fairly simple way to rectify this. Just average offense/defense together. I did this and the rankings came out very realistically.

EAST
Celtics 80 Offense, 91 Defense, 83 Overall (85.5)
Raptors 86 Offense, 78 Defense, 83 Overall (82.0)
Pistons 74 Offense, 87 Defense, 84 Overall (80.5)
76ers 64 Offense, 88 Defense, 76 Overall (76.0)
Wizards 81 Offense, 71 Defense, 74 Overall (76.0)
Magic 77 Offense, 71 Defense, 73 Overall (74.0)
Bobcats 64 Offense, 81 Defense, 67 Overall (72.5)
Hawks 68 Offense,74 Defense, 71 Overall (71.0)
Cavaliers 53 Offense, 86 Defense, 60 Overall (69.5)
Bucks 74 Offense, 60 Defense, 65 Overall (67.0)
Heat 63 Offense, 69 Defense, 64 Overall (66.0)
Bulls 57 Offense, 74 Defense, 72 Overall (65.5)
Knicks 76 Offense, 55 Defense, 61 Overall (65.5)
Nets 63 Offense, 66 Defense, 64 Overall (64.5)
Pacers 63 Offense, 61 Defense, 63 Overall (62.0)

WEST
Lakers 84 Offense, 87 Defense, 85 Overall (85.5)
Rockets 83 Offense, 86 Defense, 85 Overall (84.5)
Mavericks 86 Offense, 82 Defense, 85 Overall (84.0)
Jazz 82 Offense, 84 Defense, 82 Overall (83.0)
Suns 95 Offense, 70 Defense, 90 Overall (82.5)
Spurs 68 Offense, 95 Defense, 92 Overall (81.5)
Hornets 81 Offense, 79 Defense, 80 Overall (80.0)
Nuggets 73 Offense, 75 Defense, 75 Overall (74.0)
Clippers 60 Offense, 80 Defense, 70 Overall (70.0)
Blazers 64 Offense, 73 Defense, 68 Overall (68.5)
Warriors 66 Offense, 68 Defense, 67 Overall (67.0)
T’Wolves 73 Offense, 57 Defense, 72 Overall (65.0)
Grizzlies 55 Offense, 69 Defense, 59 Overall (62.0)
Thunder 59 Offense, 63 Defense, 61 Overall (61.0)
Kings 55 Offense, 61 Defense, 59 Overall (58.0)

It has really annoyed me that no matter what I do to the Spurs or Suns they are always rated in the 90s. This shows that they are not at the top of the league. As you can see, some teams have a perfect average (Hornets: 81/79 = 80; Clippers 60/80 = 70; Nuggets 73/75 = 74; etc) while the game seems to just boost Spurs/Suns for god knows whatever reason.

This method shows the Celtics and Lakers are the two top teams in the league. (For whatever reason, Celtics only have 7th highest overall rating despite 3 all-stars). Lakers are their equal thanks to a healthy Bynum. The Rockets with their 3 stars are right behind them as they should be. All these teams trail the Suns/Spurs by 5+ overall but it should be clear who the superior teams are.

Damn, nicely done. looks like you put a lot of time into this.

[AgentTurner0]

Hooray for more people who can't read bolded type!

Big Ben and Varejao destroy Cleveland's rating thanks to their offensive ineptitude. If you bench both, take them both out of the rotation, and start Wally Szczerbiak at PF, Cleveland has 74/77 Off/Def and a 75 overall rating. Don't ***** at me because of 2k's messed up coding.

And the Bobcats are a decent 8th seed quality team when healthy. Their main problem is Sean May has missed the last two years, and Gerald Wallace is good to miss 30 games a year. They have a thin bench and are obviously a worse team with Matt Carroll and Nazr Mohammed starting games.



If you're counting Devin Brown as a good addition, that pretty much justifies their ranking.

They replaced Jannero Pargo with James Posey. Big whoop. They're still the same team.

once again buddy ur wrong about cleavland if the bobcats are better they would be in the playoffs but they are not beacuase they have no real star because jason richardson and gerald wallace always wanna shoot instead of doing what they are in the nba for...DUNKING but instead they wanna shoot 3s sure they hit them every now and then but still cleavland is the better team imo

[J-H!zZl3]

Well Gerald Wallace is a good all around player. He can do more than dunk. He can score, rebound, steal, and he is avery good defender who can guard multiple positions. But yeah the Cavs are better than the Bobcats, who haven't even sniffed the playoffs yet.

[Rashidi]

i can agree with most everything here except Chris Paul 97 and D-wade a 95 :(

no way Chris Paul has a higher overall then D-wade

Paul had an MVP caliber season (finishing 2nd to Kobe) and one of the best seasons for a PG ever, which says a lot considering Steve Nash took home MVP in 2005 and 2006.

Ignoring the injuries, Wade is a high volume scorer that mostly needs the ball in his hands to be effective, and one with the same jumper deficiencies as LeBron (if not worse, due to worse range). He's the 2nd best SG in the league, but he hasn't had much of a noticeable impact on his teammates, and even at Miami's peak they still topped out at 52 wins or so the year they won the championship (Paul's Hornets had 56 or 58 I believe, playing in the much tougher west).

[AgentTurner0]

Well Gerald Wallace is a good all around player. He can do more than dunk. He can score, rebound, steal, and he is avery good defender who can guard multiple positions. But yeah the Cavs are better than the Bobcats, who haven't even sniffed the playoffs yet.
yea i have been 2 plenty of bobcat games i was even at this game right here when wallace did this nasty block

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wBhEaQ3HYw

[O'Dane]

eh not feeling dem

[Rashidi]

francis will be 82

He's an 80 at default in 2k8, and missed the whole year with injury.

If he actually went up in rating, I'd return the game.

[Rashidi]

Why are the 76ers and Clippers so low on offense ??

Clippers top three scorers are Baron, Ricky, and Kaman, which isn't good. Needless to say, this doesn't compare to trios like

Kobe/Gasol/Odom
Deron/Boozer/Okur
Paul/West/Peja
Dirk/Kidd/Howard
Bosh/O'Neal/Calderon

Etc.

Sixers top three are Brand, Iguodala, and Miller. Better than the Clipps, but not by much.

[Nicotrel]

Will you keep making the faqs or do you think you'll just juse the 2kshare feature?

I'm looking forward to adjust the ratings with your Player Edit Guide.
I really like it, how you do your ratings. It seems you think through it better and longer than 2k themself!

Hope you'll keep working for another couple of years!

[Rashidi]

once again buddy ur wrong about cleavland if the bobcats are better they would be in the playoffs but they are not beacuase they have no real star because jason richardson and gerald wallace always wanna shoot instead of doing what they are in the nba for...DUNKING but instead they wanna shoot 3s sure they hit them every now and then but still cleavland is the better team imo

Like I said: Learn to read. I never said they were a better team, and I even gave you the explanation of Cleveland's poor rating. Some people just can't be helped.

[Rashidi]

Well Gerald Wallace is a good all around player. He can do more than dunk. He can score, rebound, steal, and he is avery good defender who can guard multiple positions. But yeah the Cavs are better than the Bobcats, who haven't even sniffed the playoffs yet.

Bobcats
Okafor 86
May 80
Wallace 85
Richardson 84
Felton 82
Bench
Mohammed 78
Augustin 76
Carroll 75
Dudley 74

Cavaliers
Ilgauskas 86
Wallace 79
LeBron 97
Pavlovic 74
Williams 84
Bench
Szczerbiak 80
Varejao 78
West 78
Gibson 74
Kinsey 73

When HEALTHY the Bobcats are a decent team. Take away two of their starters and they are lottery bound. It should be obvious which team has the better bench and is better suited to deal with injury.

[i cant dunk]

you got to put coaches system into play because Cleveland play some awesome "TEAM" defense but individually they aren't the best but with mike brown as coach he makes the D allot better then what it comes out to. it's quite hard to make ratings and such because some teams run and gun like phoenix and nuggets and then they play no defense in the game even though they got some good defenders.

[J-H!zZl3]

Well Phoenix only has two good defenders now and that is Raja Bell and Matt Barnes. So their team defensively is horrible even if they didnt run and gun. They actually run and gun to make up for their defensive deficiencies. They try to outscore people whic hasn't worked obviously and especially against SA.

[Rashidi]

Well Phoenix only has two good defenders now and that is Raja Bell and Matt Barnes. So their team defensively is horrible even if they didnt run and gun. They actually run and gun to make up for their defensive deficiencies. They try to outscore people whic hasn't worked obviously and especially against SA.

Grant Hill is a pretty good defender. Diaw isn't bad either. Amare has excellent defensive tools but a poor IQ, as does Shaq who is only limited by his poor quickness at this stage of his career.

They aren't nearly as bad of a defensive team as everyone makes them out to be. Just not very good compared to other contenders.

[defensiveminded]

Clippers top three scorers are Baron, Ricky, and Kaman, which isn't good. Needless to say, this doesn't compare to trios like

Kobe/Gasol/Odom
Deron/Boozer/Okur
Paul/West/Peja
Dirk/Kidd/Howard
Bosh/O'Neal/Calderon

Etc.

Sixers top three are Brand, Iguodala, and Miller. Better than the Clipps, but not by much.
well i don't mean really high or anything but, i am from dallas and always liked dallas, but kidd ain't nothin anymore,howard isnt consistant at all, and although Dirk is my favorite player of all time he isn't good enough from the low post he relies too much on the high-post/mid-range turn a round fades....and brand iggy miller aint no sloutch

[StEpHoN_mArBuRy]

Knicks rated lower than the pacers??? :rolleyes:

[J-H!zZl3]

Grant Hill is a pretty good defender. Diaw isn't bad either. Amare has excellent defensive tools but a poor IQ, as does Shaq who is only limited by his poor quickness at this stage of his career.

They aren't nearly as bad of a defensive team as everyone makes them out to be. Just not very good compared to other contenders.

I was going to say Grant Hill but age and injuies is getting to him and Amare can block shots and he is atletic, but yeah his IQ on defense is terrible. He is a offensive monster, but I wish he could become a great overall PF in this league. But that wont happen until he becomes a defensive force also.

[AgentTurner0]

Like I said: Learn to read. I never said they were a better team, and I even gave you the explanation of Cleveland's poor rating. Some people just can't be helped.
you puting there rating higher means u say that they are better that is why they have ratings for right?

[GoodOiledMachine]

My concern is my Spurs, so here i go with my opinions about my team:

1- Manu is better than Tony. Tony deserves a 90 or 91. So Manu is a 91 or 92. I think Tony 90 and Manu 92 (after last season monster performance).
2- Spurs with 68 Offense???? hummm. With a PG 90 + SG 92 + PF 98, also with a lot of great 3pts shooters (Finley, Bonner, Mason, Udoka, Bowen), and decent Center, not bums (Kurt Thomas and Oberto). I think Spurs offense is in the 70's. Maybe a 77 Offensive Rating.
3- I agree in the Defense department. For the last decade (including last season), Spurs have been at least Top 3 best defensive teams. They have reached several times the #1 spot in the NBA best defensive team. So, a 95 Defensive Rate is nice and realistic.

[Penny]

I'm curious ... how do these ratings influence the game? Or is this just what you think they should be?

[NorcalBalla23]

Tony parker 90. Manu 90. Timmy 97.

[GoodOiledMachine]

Tony 91 Manu 92 Duncan 98 Thats not my opinion, thats a fact. nuff said.

[PSL1]

wow the Bobcats are actually rated better than the Cavs. WOW.

[Rashidi]

We know what a league average starter looks like, but what about a league average 6th man?

76 W. Green
81 T. Outlaw
78 Mohammed
83 Nocioni
78 Varejao
76 T. Allen
79 Stackhouse
79 J.R. Smith
76 Pachulia
80 Maxiell
80 Battier
80 J. Jack
82 Barbosa
86 Camby
76 Farmar
76 Lowry
80 Haslem
77 C. Bell
76 Posey
78 McCants
76 Najera
79 D. Lee
77 Pietrus
77 D. Wilkins
78 Salmons
78 Finley
76 Bargnani
81 Millsap
83 S. Jackson
77 A. Daniels

Average Sixth Man Rating: 78.63

8 sixth men were rated 76, the lowest rating
4 were rated 77
4 were rated 78
3 were rated 79
4 were rated 80

Everyone higher is basically your 6th man of year candidates

Millsap and Outlaw rated 81
Barbosa rated 82
Nocioni and S. Jackson 83
Camby the highest at 86

Ben Gordon (81) will probably be the 6th man on whatever team he ends up with (not Chicago). Also notable is Derrick Rose (81) off the bench (and if he starts, could force 84 ovr Hinrich into 6th man role)

[StEpHoN_mArBuRy]

Put NAte RObinson on the 6th man list

[NorcalBalla23]

Tony 91 Manu 92 Duncan 98 Thats not my opinion, thats a fact. nuff said.

Wrong. Garnet>Duncan.

[Mr.Clutch_Knicks12]

These look like NBA Live 08's ratings. Nothing over 85.

[Rashidi]

wow the Bobcats are actually rated better than the Cavs. WOW.

Wow another person who can't read. WOW.

[AgentTurner0]

yo rashidi u putting the bobcats rating higher than the cavs aparently u think they are better regardless of wat u say if u rate them higher it means u think they are better remember actions speak louder than words....

[Rashidi]

Knicks rated lower than the pacers??? :rolleyes:

Uh, the whole point of this was to show you can't trust overall rating. The Pacers are the worst team in the east and are such when you average Off/Def together.

[Christian Cordero]

Rashidi your ratings is always banging.

[Christian Cordero]

Man I want YOUR ROSTER DOWNLOAD when I get this game. You always do it perfect. They need to hire you or something. Keep me posted bra...1 Love.

[Mr.Clutch_Knicks12]

Wrong. Garnet>Duncan.

I know that this post wasn't directed at me, but I feel obligated to answer it. Duncan is the ultimate winner, Kevin Garnett isn't. Since Tim Duncan entered the league, the Spurs never had a below 50 win season, and they never had a 3(Can't remember if its 3 or 5) game losing streak. Tim Duncan takes the phrase" makes his teammates better" to a whole nother level. And KG had good enough teammates to take to the playoffs year after year. In the 05-06 season he had Wally Szcerbiak, and Ricky Davis as well as a solid Marcus Banks. They didn't make the playoffs, and they did have a solid supporting cast.

[defensiveminded]

ha your doing a good job,rashidi, and i got the point, so these people just need to learn to read....i member last year when i edited the whole roster when i got the game i lowed the suns off alot and it stayed exactly the same

[Rashidi]

well i don't mean really high or anything but, i am from dallas and always liked dallas, but kidd ain't nothin anymore,howard isnt consistant at all, and although Dirk is my favorite player of all time he isn't good enough from the low post he relies too much on the high-post/mid-range turn a round fades....and brand iggy miller aint no sloutch

Dirk is a better offensive player than Brand, without question. We can nit pick his low post game all we want, it won't take away what a great shooter he is.

Iggy is basically Josh Howard with more explosiveness and a worse shot. His points have been inflated masquerading as a first option, while on a contender he'd really only be a 3rd option.

Miller is a better driver and mid-range player than Kidd, but he has no 3pt range to speak of, and isn't the passer or pusher of tempo Kidd is.

The Mavs also have Jason Terry which gives them four valuable offensive players. The Sixers next best offensive player is... Louis Williams? Willie Green? Thaddeus Young? Samuel Dalembert? There's a big dropoff.

[Rashidi]

I know that this post wasn't directed at me, but I feel obligated to answer it. Duncan is the ultimate winner, Kevin Garnett isn't. Since Tim Duncan entered the league, the Spurs never had a below 50 win season, and they never had a 3(Can't remember if its 3 or 5) game losing streak.

Tim Duncan was got to play with a Hall of Famer in David Robinson when he was drafted. And his team was able to reload with Ginobili and Parker to carry the torch after Robinson retired. He didn't have to build a franchise from scratch.

Garnett was drafted by the worst franchise in the league to be their savior. They never sniffed playoffs until he came around, and he continually made them a 40-50 win team. Thier second best player was Wally Szczerbiak, so they really couldn't have done much better. The years they won 50 games they were only a 6th or 7th seed and matched up against a much better team like the Lakers, and were expected to lose.

Unlike Duncan, KG was supported by one of the worst GMs in the league. McHale cost the team FIVE FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICKS and essentially destroyed any chance of Minnesota being able to contend in the future.

In the 05-06 season he had Wally Szcerbiak, and Ricky Davis as well as a solid Marcus Banks. They didn't make the playoffs, and they did have a solid supporting cast.

1. They didn't have Wally and Ricky, they TRADED Wally for Ricky.
2. Marcus Banks at his very best is a below average starting PG.

Before Boston, KG never played with a player the same caliber of Manu or Parker, or even an aging David Robinson. When he did, they won 60+ games and the championship.

[Rashidi]

yo rashidi u putting the bobcats rating higher than the cavs aparently u think they are better regardless of wat u say if u rate them higher it means u think they are better remember actions speak louder than words....

Idiocy also speaks louder than words.

[KiiNg$Cadiillac$23]

I understand ur concept, but these ratings are too high IMO. I used ur ratings before, I just dont like how the scrubs be coming and dropping 15 to 25 pts for example players like Jacque Vaughn, Scott Pollard, Eric Piatkowski. Overall ur work is decent though its much better than a lot of people over at OS thats for sure.

[Rashidi]

My concern is my Spurs, so here i go with my opinions about my team:

[]Manu is better than Tony. Tony deserves a 90 or 91. So Manu is a 91 or 92. I think Tony 90 and Manu 92 (after last season monster performance).

Parker was also hurt for a bit last year. Ginobili put up better stats with Parker out. They are about the same in terms of importance (actually, Parker is probably more important since Manu plays a more complimentary role with Parker out there).

2- Spurs with 68 Offense???? hummm. With a PG 90 + SG 92 + PF 98, also with a lot of great 3pts shooters (Finley, Bonner, Mason, Udoka, Bowen), and decent Center, not bums (Kurt Thomas and Oberto). I think Spurs offense is in the 70's. Maybe a 77 Offensive Rating.

That's the way the 2k rating engine bounces. I have every player rated accurately. Bowen drags their rating down. He might be a good 3pt shooter, but the fact is he's a 6 ppg scorer, only capable of catching and shooting. He is a poor ball handler, doesn't create for others, and can't create for himself. Standing in a corner waiting for Duncan to get doubled doesn't make one a good offensive player (everything said also applies to Udoka). After the big three it's a very limited offensive team, basically guys who only catch and shoot. Mason will give them another guy who can handle the ball, but it's not like he's a godsend offensively.

3- I agree in the Defense department. For the last decade (including last season), Spurs have been at least Top 3 best defensive teams. They have reached several times the #1 spot in the NBA best defensive team. So, a 95 Defensive Rate is nice and realistic.

It's mainly due to Duncan and Bowen. No other team has two defensive players that good (9/10 don't even have one, for that matter).

[Rashidi]

I understand ur concept, but these ratings are too high IMO. I used ur ratings before, I just dont like how the scrubs be coming and dropping 15 to 25 pts for example players like Jacque Vaughn, Scott Pollard, Eric Piatkowski. Overall ur work is decent though its much better than a lot of people over at OS thats for sure.

Well, you can drop buckets with Piatkowski and other 3pt shooters pretty easily regardless. And bigs you can always dunk with. Vaughn, I dunno, but it's better than not being able to score at all with him.

Anybody in the NBA can drop buckets if you give them the opportunity. Those guys all take maybe two shots a game (if that) in real life, their teams always have better options on the court.

[in dumars we trust]

Before I get into this, one of the problems I've had with the ratings is the team ratings are often messed up somehow, seemingly to faulty coding.

Celtics have 80/91 Off/Def with 83 overall rating while Pistons are 74/87 (-6/-4) yet have an 84 overall rating.

I thought of a fairly simple way to rectify this. Just average offense/defense together. I did this and the rankings came out very realistically.

EAST
Celtics 80 Offense, 91 Defense, 83 Overall (85.5)
Raptors 86 Offense, 78 Defense, 83 Overall (82.0)
Pistons 74 Offense, 87 Defense, 84 Overall (80.5)
76ers 64 Offense, 88 Defense, 76 Overall (76.0)
Wizards 81 Offense, 71 Defense, 74 Overall (76.0)
Magic 77 Offense, 71 Defense, 73 Overall (74.0)
Bobcats 64 Offense, 81 Defense, 67 Overall (72.5)
Hawks 68 Offense,74 Defense, 71 Overall (71.0)
Cavaliers 53 Offense, 86 Defense, 60 Overall (69.5)
Bucks 74 Offense, 60 Defense, 65 Overall (67.0)
Heat 63 Offense, 69 Defense, 64 Overall (66.0)
Bulls 57 Offense, 74 Defense, 72 Overall (65.5)
Knicks 76 Offense, 55 Defense, 61 Overall (65.5)
Nets 63 Offense, 66 Defense, 64 Overall (64.5)
Pacers 63 Offense, 61 Defense, 63 Overall (62.0)

WEST
Lakers 84 Offense, 87 Defense, 85 Overall (85.5)
Rockets 83 Offense, 86 Defense, 85 Overall (84.5)
Mavericks 86 Offense, 82 Defense, 85 Overall (84.0)
Jazz 82 Offense, 84 Defense, 82 Overall (83.0)
Suns 95 Offense, 70 Defense, 90 Overall (82.5)
Spurs 68 Offense, 95 Defense, 92 Overall (81.5)
Hornets 81 Offense, 79 Defense, 80 Overall (80.0)
Nuggets 73 Offense, 75 Defense, 75 Overall (74.0)
Clippers 60 Offense, 80 Defense, 70 Overall (70.0)
Blazers 64 Offense, 73 Defense, 68 Overall (68.5)
Warriors 66 Offense, 68 Defense, 67 Overall (67.0)
T’Wolves 73 Offense, 57 Defense, 72 Overall (65.0)
Grizzlies 55 Offense, 69 Defense, 59 Overall (62.0)
Thunder 59 Offense, 63 Defense, 61 Overall (61.0)
Kings 55 Offense, 61 Defense, 59 Overall (58.0)

It has really annoyed me that no matter what I do to the Spurs or Suns they are always rated in the 90s. This shows that they are not at the top of the league. As you can see, some teams have a perfect average (Hornets: 81/79 = 80; Clippers 60/80 = 70; Nuggets 73/75 = 74; etc) while the game seems to just boost Spurs/Suns for god knows whatever reason.

This method shows the Celtics and Lakers are the two top teams in the league. (For whatever reason, Celtics only have 7th highest overall rating despite 3 all-stars). Lakers are their equal thanks to a healthy Bynum. The Rockets with their 3 stars are right behind them as they should be. All these teams trail the Suns/Spurs by 5+ overall but it should be clear who the superior teams are.

Saying the Lakers were one of the top two teams in the league is ignorant. They gave up very little fight compared to the Pistons and the Cavs. If you look at the Pistons, they win game 3 and the series is theirs. You look at the Cavs who lost in Game 7 in a close game. But the Lakers. Hmmmm. And giving Detroit a 74 offensive rating isn't to smart. Points per game isn't the true way to figure out how good their offense is. They play at a very slow pace and behind Utah have the highest scoring effeciency rating in the league. At least if your going by points per game then do it for defense too because by your offensive rating, the Pistons should be behind Boston with the second best defense rating.

This rating system is very bias.

[Rashidi]

Saying the Lakers were one of the top two teams in the league is ignorant. They gave up very little fight compared to the Pistons and the Cavs.

Oh right, because how they match up against one team really says a lot. I also noticed how you didn't mention the Hawks, seeing as how that would have killed your argument.

Hawks > Lakers > Spurs

Right?


And giving Detroit a 74 offensive rating isn't to smart.

Not reading the first line of the topic isn't very smart either.


Points per game isn't the true way to figure out how good their offense is.

Good thing I don't use points per game then!


They play at a very slow pace and behind Utah have the highest scoring effeciency rating in the league.

Hence why they aren't rated 54 offensively. And actually, they were 7th. Utah was 14th.

1. Suns
2. Lakers
3. Warriors
4. Hornets
5. Magic
6. Mavericks
7. Pistons

(Btw, since when does FG% equal efficiency? There's just a tad more to it than that.)


This rating system is very bias.

Ironic that you started off this post by calling me ignorant - if anything, you've shown very little understanding of how 2k's rating systems work. If only people educated themselves before running their mouths...

[nowitzkiftw]

If this has been mentioned already then ignore it but team chemistry affects team ratings.
Probably why some teams are always high and some teams are lower then their talent level might indicate.

[Rashidi]

If this has been mentioned already then ignore it but team chemistry affects team ratings.
Probably why some teams are always high and some teams are lower then their talent level might indicate.

These ratings are from the Quick Game screen, not from association. Every team starts with 75% morale in association.

[ibe3zy]

people on this forum really need to stop the rating threads
Cant we all have patience and let the developers do their job and let THEM rate each team fairly.
whats the point of making multiple rating threads.Why doesnt someone just sticky"Official rating Thread" instead of having people clog the forum with threads with the same subject.

same subject,different ratings,same complain-"you rated my team too low!"

[Rashidi]

people on this forum really need to stop the rating threads
Cant we all have patience and let the developers do their job and let THEM rate each team fairly.

1. The developers have yet to rate each team fairly
2. I've been doing this for 6 years. People have continually told me I do a better job on the ratings than 2k. Most of the top roster editors out there copy my ratings as a base.

whats the point of making multiple rating threads.Why doesnt someone just sticky"Official rating Thread" instead of having people clog the forum with threads with the same subject.

That's like saying why don't we just sticky "Official gameplay thread". If you don't want to view the topic, there are 24 others on the main page for you to click.

If there are a lot of posts in a particular field, that means it's a popular topic.

same subject,different ratings,same complain-"you rated my team too low!"

There are far fewer ratings topics than "Kobe is better than so and so" topics, and those always play out the same way. Topics get recycled. Welcome to the internet. Don't like it, don't click it.

[KJizzle]

My Hawks should be higher based of the playoff series and potential
JJ has to be a 90 there aren't to many Sg in the league better than him

[NorcalBalla23]

1. The developers have yet to rate each team fairly
2. I've been doing this for 6 years. People have continually told me I do a better job on the ratings than 2k. Most of the top roster editors out there copy my ratings as a base.



That's like saying why don't we just sticky "Official gameplay thread". If you don't want to view the topic, there are 24 others on the main page for you to click.

If there are a lot of posts in a particular field, that means it's a popular topic.



There are far fewer ratings topics than "Kobe is better than so and so" topics, and those always play out the same way. Topics get recycled. Welcome to the internet. Don't like it, don't click it.

Hmm. You must be very proud of yourself.

[Rashidi]

My Hawks should be higher based of the playoff series and potential
JJ has to be a 90 there aren't to many Sg in the league better than him

Which is why the only SG rated higher are Kobe, Wade, T-Mac, Iverson, Ginobili, Carter, and Roy

[jadubery]

Rashidi, you do a great job man. you just kinda gotta ignore these people. they have their team they play with everyday and they think they're amazing..lol so keep it up, i'll surely be using your ratings in 2k9.

[mcgradybunch]

yeah, your 93 rating for d12 is pretty accurate..the 95 rating he got from the march roster update was a bit too high...he still has to develop a more consistent post game..his post off should be high 80s at the mostl

[Rashidi]

Hmm. You must be very proud of yourself.

Don't worry about me brah. Can I call you brah?

[KJizzle]

Which is why the only SG rated higher are Kobe, Wade, T-Mac, Iverson, Ginobili, Carter, and Roy

Roy, Carter, and Ginobili aren't better

JJ is all around better that Roy not by much but still better

Carter is on his last leg JJ is a better passer and defender

Ginobili jus scores in bunches which makes him look better but all around
JJ is better

Iverson (see Ginobili) scoring and the ability to doesn't make you a better player

[Stizz]

people on this forum really need to stop the rating threads
Cant we all have patience and let the developers do their job and let THEM rate each team fairly.
whats the point of making multiple rating threads.Why doesnt someone just sticky"Official rating Thread" instead of having people clog the forum with threads with the same subject.

same subject,different ratings,same complain-"you rated my team too low!"
Maybe if 2k released more info to talk about threads like this wouldn't be created.

[Rashidi]

Roy, Carter, and Ginobili aren't better

JJ is all around better that Roy not by much but still better

Roy's mid-range game is flat out superior to JJ's, and is a better defensive player too.


Carter is on his last leg JJ is a better passer and defender

I keep hearing how Carter is on his last leg and I don't see it (it's all media perception, and not reality). He played nearly the whole year hurt and he still put up 21/6/5, which is similar to what JJ did. And he's probably a better defensive player than JJ. Both are about average covering their man, while Carter can occasionally rise up to swat a shot here and there.


Ginobili jus scores in bunches which makes him look better but all around
JJ is better

Interesting opinion. JJ's stats are padded by how many minutes he plays (41 mpg!). Ginobili plays 10 fewer minutes yet only averages 2 fewer points! JJ doesn't exactly shoot a sparkling percentage from the field either, shooting a paltry .432 which is at least 20 points lower than all the guards you listed. And you speak of "scoring in bunches" like it's a bad thing. Fact is, Johnson can't score in bunches the way Ginobili can. He's not as good of a scorer.


Iverson (see Ginobili) scoring and the ability to doesn't make you a better player

Please. As if Joe Johnson is King Versatility.

[Rashidi]

Mid-range stats

B. Roy
2008: 157-355 (.442) (74 games)
2007: 83-172 (.482)
Total: 240-527 (.455)

V. Carter
2008: 140-343 (.408) (76 games)
2007: 147-357 (.411)
2006: 133-320 (.415)
2005: 161-374 (.430)
Total: 581-1394 (.416)

J. Johnson
2008: 139-377 (.368) (82 games)
2007: 142-326 (.435)
2006: 120-295 (.406)
2005: 110-307 (.358)
Total: 511-1305 (.391)

A. Iverson
2008: 149-359 (.415) (81 games)
2007: 124-318 (.389)
2006: 180-478 (.376)
2005: 172-458 (.375)
Total: 625-1613 (.387)

M. Ginobili
2008: 72-168 (.428) (74 games)
2007: 30-91 (.329)
2006: 21-57 (.368)
2005: 15-53 (.283)
Total: 138-369 (.373)

JJ is rather middle of the pack from mid-range, and he posted by far the worst percentage of the group this year.

Foul Draw% (Percent of shots player drew foul)

Iverson: 17.1%
Ginobili: 13.2%
Roy: 11.8%
Carter: 11.3%
J. Johnson: 8.2%

Last among the group.

(let's check a few other SGs for some perspective)
K. Martin: 19.4%
Wade: 18.1%
Bryant: 15.5%
R. Brewer: 15.0%
Ellis: 13.7%
Redd: 12.8%
Dunleavy: 12.8%
Durant: 12.1%
McGrady: 10.7%
Stevenson: 9.6%
Crawford: 9.3%
J. Richardson: 9.2%
Barbosa: 8.3%
Gordon: 8.2%
Mobley: 8.0%
Terry: 7.6%
Hamilton: 6.3%
R. Allen: 6.2%
A. Parker: 6.0%
McCants: 5.7%
R. Bell: 3.0%

Pretty clear that Johnson is below average at getting to the line for such a volume scorer, while all the other compared guards are above average (with Iverson ranking 3rd and Ginobili ranked 7th among SG)

Those are just a few of the areas I guarantee you didn't think about when coming to your conclusion.

[Ishmael From Ova Da Hill]

Oh right, because how they match up against one team really says a lot. I also noticed how you didn't mention the Hawks, seeing as how that would have killed your argument.

Hawks > Lakers > Spurs

Right?




Not reading the first line of the topic isn't very smart either.




Good thing I don't use points per game then!




Hence why they aren't rated 54 offensively. And actually, they were 7th. Utah was 14th.

1. Suns
2. Lakers
3. Warriors
4. Hornets
5. Magic
6. Mavericks
7. Pistons

(Btw, since when does FG% equal efficiency? There's just a tad more to it than that.)




Ironic that you started off this post by calling me ignorant - if anything, you've shown very little understanding of how 2k's rating systems work. If only people educated themselves before running their mouths...

The bolded (bottom) part of this quote should be stickied.

[Rashidi]

Overall ratings of 2nd string PGs
75 Louis Williams (rates 78 as SG)
73 Jerryd Bayless (rates 78 as SG)
76 DJ Augustin
76 Ramon Sessions
81 Derrick Rose
78 Delonte West (rates 81 as SG)
73 Eddie House (rates 77 as SG)
78 Jason Williams
76 Kyle Lowry
73 Ronald Murray (rates 76 as SG)
71 Marcus Banks
73 Mike James
79 Brevin Knight
76 Bobby Jackson
78 Nate Robinson
76 Jordan Farmar
75 Anthony Johnson
68 Jose Barea
74 Keyon Dooling (rates 77 as SG)
75 Chucky Atkins
80 Jarrett Jack
77 Rodney Stuckey (rates 77 as SG)
73 Will Solomon
73 Aaron Brooks
75 Russell Westbrook (rates 77 as SG)
72 Jacque Vaughn
68 Goran Dragic
75 Sebastian Telfair
70 CJ Watson
77 Antonio Daniels

Average rating: 74.8

so...

Average starter: 84
Average backup: 75

Best PG teams
Jazz +13 (Williams +9, Knight +4)
Wizards +12 (Arenas +10, Daniels +2)
Hornets +11 (Paul +13, James -2)
Pistons +9 (Billups +7, Stuckey +2)
Clippers +9 ( Davis +6, Williams +3)
Bulls +6 (Hinrich +0, Rose +6)
Pacers +6 (Ford +1, Jack +5)
Suns +4 (Nash +11, Dragic -7)

Worst PG teams
T'Wolves -6 (Foye -6, Telfair -0)
Kings -6 (Udrih -7, Jackson +1)
Blazers -8 (Blake -6, Bayless -2)
Nuggets -9 (Carter -9, Atkins -0)
Heat -15 (Quinn -11, Banks -4)
Warriors -15 (Williams -10, Watson -5)

[V!n$an!+y]

I think your ratings are very accurate dude! I just think some ppl are kind of biased with their favorite teams. but great job.

[chessboxer1]

B
It has really annoyed me that no matter what I do to the Spurs or Suns they are always rated in the 90s. This shows that they are not at the top of the league. As you can see, some teams have a perfect average (Hornets: 81/79 = 80; Clippers 60/80 = 70; Nuggets 73/75 = 74; etc) while the game seems to just boost Spurs/Suns for god knows whatever reason.



hard coding in some games is a bit** isn't it? I think the influence of players suchs as nash and duncan give players a boost. i think the knock on garnett and allen coming into this year was they lacked something to get their teams over the top. but point of all this is that the computer has some secret ratings that even you can't get to to make some players have more influence than others.

[ksuttonjr76]

Videogame ratings - Numbers based on compilated data over a course of a season, and with data that covers more than just PPG, APG, RPG, etc. Ratings that are generated by the data are completely OBJECTIVE and NOT SUBJECTIVE. Ratings are not designed to justify which players are "better", but allows designers to develop programming to acurately "predict" what may happen when two AI players are pitted against each other during contextual situations. The overall rating is just a mathmatical end result of the various viewable and hidden ratings used, and are no way a indicator of the player's real life skills.

http://www.82games.com/ is an example of a website that analyzes data which is normally not considered by the average (in some cases, hardcore) NBA fans.

In the end...stop being bias about certain players. When it's all said and done, 2KSports is going enter various statisical data in a "calculator", and it's going to generate "ratings" for the various components of a player's game. Based on those indiviual ratings, that same "calculator" is going to generate an overall rating.

Keep doing your thang Rashidi. On a side note, you concidentially wouldn't have projected ratings for Brandon Rush and Roy Hibbert, and a predication to how they may help/hinder Indiana in the absence of JO?

[Rashidi]

Keep doing your thang Rashidi. On a side note, you concidentially wouldn't have a projected ratings for Brandon Rush and Roy Hibbert, and a predication to how they may help/hinder Indiana in the absence of JO?

I didn't get to Indiana yet. I only make maybe 1 or 2 players a day.

Rookies I got so far
81 Rose (PG)
83 Beasley (PF)
82 Mayo (SG)
75 Westbrook (PG) - rates 77 as SG
80 Love (PF)
73 Gallinari (SF)
78 Gordon (SG)
73 Alexander (PF)
78 B. Lopez (C)
76 Augustin (PG)
73 Bayless (PG) - rates 78 as SG
69 Randolph (SF) - rates 72 as PF
72 R. Lopez (C)
74 Speights (C)
70 McGee (C)
68 Ajinca (C)
74 Koufos (C)
71 Batum (SF)
73 Greene (SF)
72 Giddens (SG)
68 Mbah a Moute (SF)
68 Dragic (PG)
72 Walker (SF)
72 Hendrix (PF)

More than I thought. 24 down, approximately 20 to go (9 of them first rounders).

[Stizz]

Are you going to update your player rating FAQ with these Rashidi?

[chessboxer1]

74 Speights (C)


speights is a PF man, i know he played in the post in the preaseason but that was cause jason smith is better away from the basket. He guarded only PF's and smith guarded the centers.

[mcgradybunch]

Mikeal Pietrus

whats his def awareness rating , speed, strength and onball d gonna be? Those are the most important element he will bring to team disneworld

[AgentTurner0]

u guys need 2 chill this guy doesnt work with 2k

[Rockblues]

u guys need 2 chill this guy doesnt work with 2k

yeah,,its just his opinion. some are good, some are biased

[J-Mail]

It's too bad you can't do ratings without people complaining about the smallest things, for example: "OmFg n00b u rated dis teem betta then that teem by one point omg u r retard!"

I like your ratings. The only thing that i thought was out of proportion was that the nugget's offensive rating was very low. But i'm sure you had reason behind that.
Kudos

[ksuttonjr76]

u guys need 2 chill this guy doesnt work with 2k

He should be. I've been trusting his FAQs for a couple of years now, and I'm always confident that he can defend his assessment with logical answers.

For example, I believe that Indiana's offensive rating should be higher (Top 10 easily), because they finish 7th in the NBA for PPG, and 8th for 3PT FG%. Also, they finished 7th in rebounding, while being 14th after the adjusted FG%. With the black and white stats, Indiana should be one of the better offensive teams when you take in consideration they obtained more offense with the acquistion of TJ Ford and Brandon Rush, plus the presumed ratings boost of Dunleavy and Granger.

The reason why Indiana is so low (videogame wise) is......

[B3AST]

hey rashidi, can you predict the player ratings of the new york knicks...i appreciate it :thumbsup:

[Rashidi]

speights is a PF man, i know he played in the post in the preaseason but that was cause jason smith is better away from the basket. He guarded only PF's and smith guarded the centers.

Smith is also out for the season. At least half of Speights minutes will likely come at the C spot, so the listed position is pretty much a wash.

PF - Brand, Evans, occasionally Young
C - Dalembert, Ratliff, occasionally Brand

Ratliff is too injury prone to be counted on throughout the season (and hurts the team on offense even more than Evans). Speights is easily the best scorer of the bunch after Brand. Brand is coming off an injury and they probably will try to avoid pushing him too hard (or at least they should).

[Rashidi]

I like your ratings. The only thing that i thought was out of proportion was that the nugget's offensive rating was very low. But i'm sure you had reason behind that.
Kudos

They are dragged down by Anthony Carter, and to some extent K-Mart and Nene.
Put JR Smith in the starting lineup for Carter and their Offense goes from 73 to 76.
73 isn't even that bad of an offensive rating considering all the teams in the 60s.

95 Suns - Nash, Amare, Shaq, Barbosa, Hill
86 Mavericks - Dirk, Kidd, Howard, Terry, Stackhouse
86 Raptors - Bosh, O'Neal, Calderon, shooters (Parker/Kapono/Bargnani)
84 Lakers - Kobe, Gasol, Odom, Bynum
83 Rockets - T-Mac, Yao, Artest
82 Jazz - Deron, Boozer, Okur
81 Hornets - CP3, West, Peja
81 Wizards - Arenas, Jamison, Butler
80 Celtics - KG, Pierce, Allen
76 Knicks - Randolph, Marbury, Crawford, Curry

Carter starting over Smith is the difference between 10th (above average) and 15th (average).

After JR Smith, Linas Kleiza, and Chucky Atkins its only defensive role players on the bench.
Anthony Carter, Dahntay Jones, Renaldo Balkman, Chris Andersen, Steven Hunter. Yuck.

[Rashidi]

For example, I believe that Indiana's offensive rating should be higher (Top 10 easily), because they finish 7th in the NBA for PPG, and 8th for 3PT FG%.

Their ppg was mostly due to their high pace, which was 3rd in the league AHEAD of the Suns and only trailing the Nuggets and Warriors. They do have some great shooters, but they have absolutely no inside scoring, and if you look at the list in the previous post, the game values that a lot (not to mention they don't have any all-star caliber offensive players). I also have Tinsley on the IR bc the team is committed to not playing him. I did add Roy Hibbert last night which did boost their rating a bit. They are now 63 Off, 62 Def, 63 Ovr (62.5 Avg)

Also, while the Pacers did add TJ Ford, they did so at the cost of Jermaine O'Neal, and I think most would acknowledge he's a better offensive player than Ford.

Indiana scored 108 points per 100 possessions (per possessions being our basis for offensive efficiency). This only ranked 18th in the league. For those curious, Phoenix was 1st at 115.8 points per 100 possessions, while Seattle was 30th with 101.7 per 100.

Now in fairness to the Pacers, 18th isn't so bad, as the gap between 18th and 13th is less than a point (Spurs w/ 108.9 per 100). They were more or less middle of the pack offensively last year.

Also, they finished 7th in rebounding, while being 14th after the adjusted FG%.

Yeah but rebounding also goes back to their pace, and they should be worse since they lost Jermaine O'Neal. Hibbert isn't a great rebounder for his size, and it sounds like the Pacers want to run Granger out at PF in a small ball lineup in some games (which really puts Hibbert's usefulness in a tough spot... this team reminds me of the Knicks in the sense that they have too many players suited to opposing styles).

With the black and white stats, Indiana should be one of the better offensive teams when you take in consideration they obtained more offense with the acquistion of TJ Ford and Brandon Rush, plus the presumed ratings boost of Dunleavy and Granger.

Ford, Dunleavy, and Granger aren't all-stars though, and it's tough to argue any of them is even top 10 at their respective position. Rush might be good eventually but for now I don't see him doing much better than his older brother did last year (7 ppg off the bench or thereabouts). Their front court consists of Murphy, Hibbert, Nesterovic, and Foster (in order of offensive effectiveness). There won't be many worse offensive front lines.

C Nesterovic (78)
PF Murphy (79)
SF Granger (83)
SG Dunleavy (83)
PG Ford (85)
Bench
PG Jack (80)
C Foster (76)
SG Daniels (75)
C Hibbert (77)
SF Rush (75) (guesstimate)
PG Diener (73)
SF Graham (70)
IR
PF Baston (71)
PF McRoberts (69)
SF Williams (73) Done as Pacer
PG Tinsley (81) Done as Pacer

[chessboxer1]

Brand is coming off an injury and they probably will try to avoid pushing him too hard (or at least they should).

ha they probably should but i doubt they do. that brand speights lineup will be nice though cause both players can face up and play with their backs to the basket. i still think he will be listed as a 4 though...

[ksuttonjr76]

Their ppg was mostly due to their high pace, which was 3rd in the league AHEAD of the Suns and only trailing the Nuggets and Warriors. They do have some great shooters, but they have absolutely no inside scoring, and if you look at the list in the previous post, the game values that a lot (not to mention they don't have any all-star caliber offensive players). I also have Tinsley on the IR bc the team is committed to not playing him. I did add Roy Hibbert last night which did boost their rating a bit. They are now 63 Off, 62 Def, 63 Ovr (62.5 Avg)

Also, while the Pacers did add TJ Ford, they did so at the cost of Jermaine O'Neal, and I think most would acknowledge he's a better offensive player than Ford.

Indiana scored 108 points per 100 possessions (per possessions being our basis for offensive efficiency). This only ranked 18th in the league. For those curious, Phoenix was 1st at 115.8 points per 100 possessions, while Seattle was 30th with 101.7 per 100.

Now in fairness to the Pacers, 18th isn't so bad, as the gap between 18th and 13th is less than a point (Spurs w/ 108.9 per 100). They were more or less middle of the pack offensively last year.



Yeah but rebounding also goes back to their pace, and they should be worse since they lost Jermaine O'Neal. Hibbert isn't a great rebounder for his size, and it sounds like the Pacers want to run Granger out at PF in a small ball lineup in some games (which really puts Hibbert's usefulness in a tough spot... this team reminds me of the Knicks in the sense that they have too many players suited to opposing styles).



Ford, Dunleavy, and Granger aren't all-stars though, and it's tough to argue any of them is even top 10 at their respective position. Rush might be good eventually but for now I don't see him doing much better than his older brother did last year (7 ppg off the bench or thereabouts). Their front court consists of Murphy, Hibbert, Nesterovic, and Foster (in order of offensive effectiveness). There won't be many worse offensive front lines.

C Nesterovic (78)
PF Murphy (79)
SF Granger (83)
SG Dunleavy (83)
PG Ford (85)
Bench
PG Jack (80)
C Foster (76)
SG Daniels (75)
C Hibbert (77)
SF Rush (75) (guesstimate)
PG Diener (73)
SF Graham (70)
IR
PF Baston (71)
PF McRoberts (69)
SF Williams (73) Done as Pacer
PG Tinsley (81) Done as Pacer

^^^^^^I rest my case. The man is good. You never did answer the question about using the new 2KShare option to upload your roster edits. You would be doing a great service for the community :thumbsup:. You do put a lot of effort into your Roster Edits year after year...you might as well enjoy the limelight since the opportunity is there. You never know. It could lead to a job within 2KSports (or EA Sports) handling roster edits and online updates.

And yeah, I had already determined that their high pace was what created their "skewed" Top 10 offensive numbers. I just wanted you to show some of the less understanding people that mere common black/white numbers don't tell the whole story ;).

* Crossing fingers that Indiana will still be able to get a good deal for Tinsely and Williams.*

[jayrivera3]

i have been a fan of Rashidi's work since he started on the NBA2K series and have got to say that he's not biased at all.

Why would he be biased? The man takes what he does seriously and almost does it religiously. He's the best I have seen so far at rating NBA players. He's hands down better than any developer out there in my opinion. How do I know? I play video games and compare ratings. For some reason Rashidi's ratings always feel right to me. I agree with 98% of his FAQ. Sometimes I disagree with dunk/layup ratings but all in all he's the best.

I don't know how in the world he gets these ratings but he does a great job. I have been saying this for years, he should get payed for this. This goes to show you how much of a true NBA fan he is. For you people to argue with him about his ratings or what he says is asinine.

The man keeps telling you all that he's not the one generating the unrealistic ratings some teams have yet you all insist he's doing it and he's biased. Is he dumb? I think not.

I'd put money on it that if he had a say so on ratings and things of that nature, NBA2K10 would be perfect or darn near it. You wouldn't here any complaints about anything that involves ratings or player progression or anything. He might even come up with some innovative idea that we ain't never heard before.

Im just a fan of his WORK and appreciate what he does for us true NBA fans.

[Rashidi]

ha they probably should but i doubt they do. that brand speights lineup will be nice though cause both players can face up and play with their backs to the basket. i still think he will be listed as a 4 though...

He probably will be listed as a 4 by 2k but I'm notorious for switching positions without thinking about the past (after all, what matters most is the present). People complained about me having Gasol, Al Jefferson, Jermaine O'Neal, Al Horford, etc listed at center last year.

The truth is there are maybe 25-30 centers in the league, the rest are PFs like Kurt Thomas, Nick Collison, Al Horford, Kwame Brown, Andrea Bargnani, etc. With the league becoming so athletic, having quickness at C has become just as important as size.

[jayrivera3]

Rashidi, Can you do ratings for Michael Jordan? I've seen the ratings you gave him for 2k6 but can you do some for 2k9? My friend and I have been complaining and disagreeing on what we think is a good rating for Jordan. I know overall it has to be 99 with or without the hidden clutch stats but other than that we can't find anything to agree on.

We use Kobe as reference and go from there. We need help!

[jayrivera3]

Rashidi can you post MJ's player ratings from 3 separate eras?

[Rashidi]

Rashidi, Can you do ratings for Michael Jordan? I've seen the ratings you gave him for 2k6 but can you do some for 2k9? My friend and I have been complaining and disagreeing on what we think is a good rating for Jordan. I know overall it has to be 99 with or without the hidden clutch stats but other than that we can't find anything to agree on.

We use Kobe as reference and go from there. We need help!

Actually, MJ only comes out to a 97 when capped (due to all caps having 50 in clutch rating). I only made one Jordan this year and I forget if it was 80s Jordan or just an average for his career. I didn't work too much on it and I'm not really interested in revising it (I would like to eventually get to editing some of the legends already in game though, most of them are a joke and some even have the same ratings they had in 2k3)

ATTRIBUTES
Overall 97
Close 99
Med 88
3pt 74
FT 84
Layup 99
Dunk 99
Handle 96
Pass 79
PostOff 87
PostDef 78
Block 71
Steal 91
RebOff 64
RebDef 75
Speed 94
Stam 99
Dur 95
DefAwr 94
OffAwr 99
Potential 99
Strength 75
Vertical 96
Off Dribble 99
In Traffic 99
Quickness 97
Hustle 95
Hands 99
Ball Defense 93
Standing Dunk 70
Playing Time 40

TENDENCIES
Shot Tendency 99
Close Tendency 85
Med Tendency 80
3pt Tendency 24
Drive Tendency 95
Dunk Tendency 75
Back To Basket 85
Triple Threat 95
Fadeaway 90
Hook Shot 70
Putback 16
Flashy Pass 50
Foul 34
Pass Intercept 74
On Ball Steal 80
Contest Shot 44

Pretty similar to Kobe, better defensively, but notably missing Kobe's 3pt shot.

[jayrivera3]

thank you. thank you so much for taking the time to do this. thank you so much!
88 med? Phil Jackson himself has said he doesn't know who's (med) j is better when on.
96 handle? Phil Jackson himself has said Kobe is better with the ball and Jordan better off the ball, which to me means that Kobe is more creative with the ball in his hands than Jordan.
94 speed? 97 quickness? So he's a tad bit faster and a tad bit quicker than Kobe? I thought it was the other way around. Okay.
95 Drive Tendency? All of a sudden he's Kobe Bryant? Phil Jackson said that's what he respects the most about Kobe. He never stops coming at you, always putting pressure on the D.

Ima show this to my friend and see what he thinks about it. I think he'll love them. What I say means squat to him but you might be infallible in terms of NBA player ratings.

[chessboxer1]

i think this is 72 win team jordan (95-96) jordan, i'm glad someone gave him the three point shot he deserves, although it sucks you can't change his clutch rating.
personally i would have went higher on defensive awareness and on the ball defense, but thats just me...

[Rashidi]

thank you. thank you so much for taking the time to do this. thank you so much!
88 med? Phil Jackson himself has said he doesn't know who's (med) j is better when on.
96 handle? Phil Jackson himself has said Kobe is better with the ball and Jordan better off the ball, which to me means that Kobe is more creative with the ball in his hands than Jordan.
94 speed? 97 quickness? So he's a tad bit faster and a tad bit quicker than Kobe? I thought it was the other way around. Okay.
95 Drive Tendency? All of a sudden he's Kobe Bryant? Phil Jackson said that's what he respects the most about Kobe. He never stops coming at you, always putting pressure on the D.

I'm pretty sure this was a base of 80s Jordan. Actually, no, I remember now, it's based off his 1990 season, or whatever his first MVP season was.

I didn't give too much thought to the ratings you cant judge too much off stats, they're all pretty much within range of Kobe. Jordan was quicker than Kobe in his younger days, he was splitting defenses the way D-Wade does. His mid-range wasn't what it would be in the 90s but it was still quite good.

The tendencies I didn't give much thought to as they weren't really important to me, I was more focused on the attributes that counted toward his overall rating. If I redid it I'd probably tweak each of them.

[JO2TO]

i think your ratings are low for some teams i mean some teams gotta have a 90 overall

[Rashidi]

i think this is 72 win team jordan (95-96) jordan, i'm glad someone gave him the three point shot he deserves, although it sucks you can't change his clutch rating.
personally i would have went higher on defensive awareness and on the ball defense, but thats just me...

For what it's worth, I wouldn't rate the mid-90s (when the 3pt line was shortened) by straight percentage. I'd simply recommend raising the 3pt slider since everyone was hitting them at a higher clip. For whatever reason Jordan just couldn't expand his range past 22 feet.

[Rashidi]

i think your ratings are low for some teams i mean some teams gotta have a 90 overall

Impossible thanks to 2k hard coding.

[vince94]

Before it falls off the first page

EASTERN CONFERENCE

Overall rating of average starter
PG 84
SG 84
SF 83
PF 84
C 82

Sixers
Miller 85 (+1), Iguodala 86 (+2), Young 74 (-9), Brand 92 (+8), Dalembert 83 (+1)

Bobcats
Felton 82 (-2), Richardson 84 (+0), Wallace 85 (+2), May 80 (-4), Okafor 86 (+4)

Bucks
Ridnour 80 (-4), Redd 85 (+1), Jefferson 84 (+1), Villanueva 79 (-5), Bogut 82 (+0)

Bulls
Hinrich 84 (+0), Hughes 81 (-3), Deng 84 (+1), Gooden 80 (-4), Noah 76 (-6)

Cavaliers
Williams 84 (+0), Pavlovic 74 (-10), James 97 (+13), Wallace 79 (-5), Ilgauskas 86 (+4)

Celtics
Rondo 82 (-2), Allen 88 (+4), Pierce 91 (+8), Garnett 98 (+14), Perkins 77 (-5)

Hawks
Bibby 83 (-1), Johnson 88 (+4), Williams 80 (-3), Smith 86 (+2), Horford 83 (+1)

Heat
Quinn 73 (-11), Wade 95 (+11), Marion 84 (+1), Beasley 83 (-1), Blount 76 (-6)

Knicks
Marbury 81 (-3), Crawford 83 (-1), Richardson 76 (-7), Randolph 87 (+3), Curry 78 (-4)

Magic
Nelson 81 (-3), Bogans 74 (-10), Turkoglu 84 (+1), Lewis 83 (-1), Howard 93 (+11)

Nets
Harris 84 (+0), Carter 89 (+5), Simmons 77 (-6), Yi 76 (-8), Lopez 78 (-4)

Pacers
Ford 85 (+1), Dunleavy 83 (-1), Granger 83 (+0), Murphy 79 (-5), Nesterovic 78 (-4)

Pistons
Billups 91 (+7), Hamilton 87 (+3), Prince 84 (+1), McDyess 83 (-1), Wallace 87 (+5)

Raptors
Calderon 86 (+2), Parker 83 (-1), Moon 79 (-4), Bosh 92 (+8), O'Neal 89 (+7)

Wizards
Arenas 94 (+10), Stevenson 78 (-6), Butler 90 (+7), Jamison 87 (+3), Haywood 79 (-3)
Shawn Marion an 84? He was a 92 last year.

07-08 Stats
15.4 ppg
10.2 rpg

He should have a 90 rating...

[NorcalBalla23]

You have the spurs as the best team in the league. That makes no sense. they should be fifth or so.

[Slan]

Very nice ratings

[Rashidi]

Shawn Marion an 84? He was a 92 last year.

07-08 Stats
15.4 ppg
10.2 rpg

He should have a 90 rating...

Marion was also badly overrated, he has never been a superstar player, which is what a 92 overall is. The fact is there are not many teams where Marion would be considered the best player. #1 guys like Bosh, Boozer, and Brand have 92 overall, and Marion just doesn't compare. He is a 3rd fiddle on a good team (Nash's 60 win Suns), 2nd fiddle on a so-so team (Kidd's 50 win Suns).

PPG and RPG is irrelevant since he spent most of the year in Phoenix's system which inflates both numbers. Even then, 15/10 is not what you expect from a 90 player, you expect 20/10 or even 19/9 like you would from a Gasol or Jermaine type (and needless to say, Marion isn't the presence down low that they are).

The truth is Marion is a limited offensive player who has been able to score thanks to fastbreaks and the great play of his PGs. He is a complete non-factor in a half-court offense. His mid-range game is completely non-existent, he even worse from this range than similar players with reputed shooting deficiencies like Josh Smith or Andrei Kirilenko.

2005-2008 Mid-Range stats
Marion: 121-372 (.325)
DESMOND MASON: 124-378 (.328) (OUCH)
Smith: 281-830 (.338)
Kirilenko: 169-456 (.370)

Hows that compare to some stars with shooting deficiencies?
Wade 2008: 123-334 (.368)
LeBron 2008: 144-389 (.370)

Marion over FOUR YEARS has fewer makes than Wade or LeBron had this year, and his percentage is a whopping 40 points worse. This is inexcusable for a PF, much less a SF.

Hows it compare to Power Forwards?
Amare 2008: 2008: 100-205 (.487)
Boris Diaw 2008: 93-219 (.424) (Ouch. Marion's teammates sure didn't have a problem with this shot).
Aldridge 2008: 144-357 (.403)
Joe Smith 2008: 110-252 (.436) (Double Ouch)
Malik Allen 2008: 100-196 (.510) (Triple Ouch)

But don't fret, Marion did post better numbers than some players out there!

B. Scalabrine
4-Yr Total: 64-201 (.318)

J. Jeffries
4-Yr Total: 65-209 (.311)

(If you still think Marion deserves a 90, I commend your hard head).

Marion rates an 87 as a PF which goes to show he is still a good player, and he played primarily PF for Phoenix. But the truth is he is no longer suited to the SF position, which is where he'll be playing on a team with Beasley and Haslem.

Lamar Odom similarly rates an 85 as a SF but an 88 as a PF. Certain players get worse the further they get from the basket and Marion is one of them. He might have been a great wing when he was younger but he sure isn't one now, on the wrong side of 30.

[Rashidi]

You have the spurs as the best team in the league. That makes no sense. they should be fifth or so.

If you even read the first post, I pretty clearly have the Spurs ranked 6th in the west. I didn't even rank them by overall rating. WHICH WAS THE WHOLE POINT!

[Rashidi]

PS3: myaccount,miamiheat3
Team: HEAT, LAKERS, SUNS
FAVE 5: Flash Nash Matrix KB24 The Beast
08-09 Miami Heat = Champs
He should have a 90 rating...

It should be pretty clear where your biases are.

I also find it somewhat telling that I've been watching the NBA since 1994. The year of your birth.

[GoodOiledMachine]

You have the spurs as the best team in the league. That makes no sense. they should be fifth or so.

I love those comments about my Spurs. I love when people dont count with us, never writing Spurs as title contenders, and Top 5 team. I love that. But when you see history, Spurs keep breaking forecasts and predictions:

1999 CHAMPS
2003 CHAMPS
2004 West Conf Finals
2005 CHAMPS
2006 West Conf Finals
2007 CHAMPS (sweet and nasty sweep)
2008 West Conf Finals

Thanks God they are not the fav and title contenders. lol lol lol lol lol Keep writing Spurs in the last spots, and they will dissapoint you, reaching Finals or Rings. Thats their job, to turn off the forecast and predictions.

[Kingof2k08]

Don hate cuz Detriot better than Boston

[jayrivera3]

Rashidi, Do you feel that coaches play into the Team Overall Ratings? Coaches are rated in the game as well.

[NorcalBalla23]

I love those comments about my Spurs. I love when people dont count with us, never writing Spurs as title contenders, and Top 5 team. I love that. But when you see history, Spurs keep breaking forecasts and predictions:

1999 CHAMPS
2003 CHAMPS
2004 West Conf Finals
2005 CHAMPS
2006 West Conf Finals
2007 CHAMPS (sweet and nasty sweep)
2008 West Conf Finals

Thanks God they are not the fav and title contenders. lol lol lol lol lol Keep writing Spurs in the last spots, and they will dissapoint you, reaching Finals or Rings. Thats their job, to turn off the forecast and predictions.

Your wrong and they aint winning next year. Too many good teams. Spurs are getting old. Kobe has a team now. Spurs aint competing with celtics,lakers,rockets and hornets.

[Rashidi]

I love those comments about my Spurs. I love when people dont count with us, never writing Spurs as title contenders, and Top 5 team. I love that. But when you see history, Spurs keep breaking forecasts and predictions:

1999 CHAMPS
2003 CHAMPS
2004 West Conf Finals
2005 CHAMPS
2006 West Conf Finals
2007 CHAMPS (sweet and nasty sweep)
2008 West Conf Finals

Thanks God they are not the fav and title contenders. lol lol lol lol lol Keep writing Spurs in the last spots, and they will dissapoint you, reaching Finals or Rings. Thats their job, to turn off the forecast and predictions.

I don't think anyone is counting out the Spurs. They are still a very good team.
Their current problem is that three years ago they were one of three great teams in the conference, and now they are one of six.

They aren't any worse, but the rest of the conference is just as good as they are now. This poses a problem when you take into consideration they are the oldest team of the group, and they showed it last year. Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili each had bouts with injuries which ultimately caught up to them. Ginobili had to carry the team in the regular season but was hurting by the time the playoffs came around, ultimately costing them a chance to face the Celtics.

I don't buy into a trend where a team alternates winning the championship, because the truth is the Western Conference is significantly better than it was in say 1999 or 2003. Younger teams are more likely to be at full strength in the playoffs, which is going to make it that much harder for the Spurs, because with such a talented conference they can't afford to give their team much rest. Even their core role players (Finley, Bowen, Oberto, Thomas) are all on the wrong side of 30.

They will be dangerous if they get to April in one piece, but that will get increasingly tougher the older they get. Trends are broken all the time - just think of the panic if the Spurs don't win this year. The Pistons have been to the Conference Finals 6 straight seasons and Dumars is ready to break them up (they've lost the last 4). There probably isn't a team with more pressure out there than San Antonio, because they have the smallest window of any contender.

[Rashidi]

Your wrong and they aint winning next year. Too many good teams. Spurs are getting old. Kobe has a team now. Spurs aint competing with celtics,lakers,rockets and hornets.

They don't have to compete with the Celtics; they play in the LEast.

They beat the Hornets in the playoffs already. They added Posey and lost Pargo. It's arguable whether or not that's enough to push them over the Spurs in a rematch.

It will be interesting to see how Houston meshes - for all the talk of their big three, they have a real weakness at PG. I don't know how committed they will be to sharing the rock. Artest likes to shoot even though he's not the greatest offensive player out there. Yao will undoubtedly miss some time recovering from last year's injury and the olympics, and they become a scrappy team without him.

The Spurs obviously have no shot at stopping the Lakers if Ginobili isn't recovered from his ankle injury, or if Duncan/Parker is limited by injury. However, it's noteworthy that Bynum didn't play and the Lakers advanced. An Odom/Gasol frontline is actually tougher for the Spurs to guard than Gasol/Bynum. The Spurs have always struggled against quick frontlines, and I think Bynum just plays into their hands.

[NorcalBalla23]

They don't have to compete with the Celtics; they play in the LEast.

They beat the Hornets in the playoffs already. They added Posey and lost Pargo. It's arguable whether or not that's enough to push them over the Spurs in a rematch.

It will be interesting to see how Houston meshes - for all the talk of their big three, they have a real weakness at PG. I don't know how committed they will be to sharing the rock. Artest likes to shoot even though he's not the greatest offensive player out there. Yao will undoubtedly miss some time recovering from last year's injury and the olympics, and they become a scrappy team without him.

The Spurs obviously have no shot at stopping the Lakers if Ginobili isn't recovered from his ankle injury, or if Duncan/Parker is limited by injury. However, it's noteworthy that Bynum didn't play and the Lakers advanced. An Odom/Gasol frontline is actually tougher for the Spurs to guard than Gasol/Bynum. The Spurs have always struggled against quick frontlines, and I think Bynum just plays into their hands.

Celtics will most likley be in finals if spurs made it there. Posey>Pargo. Rockets are undoubtly already major contenders. Rockets have arguably the 2 best defenders in the NBA. Lakers will obviously be better with bynum.

[GoodOiledMachine]

We'll see. Only time will tell. But ill tell you the truth: Spurs love to be the underdog year after year. We'll see, just we'll see. I dont eat that theory: younger athletics teams will kill old Spurs. Yeah,, maybe im wrong, because Cavs swept Spurs in 4, and last year, everybody saw how Hornets beat the Spurs, and how the high tempo Suns beat Spurs year after year (lol lol lol sarcasm ). Thanks God Manu was injured in LAL/SAS playoff. But i repeat: we are just placing personal BIASED opinions in here. And of course, i cant expect some nice projections on the most hated team "Spurs", the team everybody called "boring". So, no wonder they are never Top contender. So thats life !!! Thats the price.

[mcgradybunch]

We'll see. Only time will tell. But ill tell you the truth: Spurs love to be the underdog year after year. We'll see, just we'll see. I dont eat that theory: younger athletics teams will kill old Spurs. Yeah,, maybe im wrong, because Cavs swept Spurs in 4, and last year, everybody saw how Hornets beat the Spurs, and how the high tempo Suns beat Spurs year after year. Thanks God Manu was injured in LAL/SAS playoff. But i repeat: we are just placing personal BIASED opinions in here. And of course, i cant expect some nice projections on the most hated team "Spurs", the team everybody called "boring". So, no wonder they are never Top contender. So thats life !!! Thats the price.


I do feel sorry for the spurs though....They never get any credit, never get any ink, never get any love..theyre not on espn, tnt, abc as much as lakers, cavs, rockets..duncan's a 4x champ, 2x mvp and he doesnt get enough love from media, fans because he is "boring"...................... I respect what the spurs have done..had manu not been injured in the WCF vs lakers...it wouldve been interesting

[NorcalBalla23]

We'll see. Only time will tell. But ill tell you the truth: Spurs love to be the underdog year after year. We'll see, just we'll see. I dont eat that theory: younger athletics teams will kill old Spurs. Yeah,, maybe im wrong, because Cavs swept Spurs in 4, and last year, everybody saw how Hornets beat the Spurs, and how the high tempo Suns beat Spurs year after year (lol lol lol sarcasm ). Thanks God Manu was injured in LAL/SAS playoff. But i repeat: we are just placing personal BIASED opinions in here. And of course, i cant expect some nice projections on the most hated team "Spurs", the team everybody called "boring". So, no wonder they are never Top contender. So thats life !!! Thats the price.

Thats just the problem with the spurs. If they have any 1 of their big 3 injured they are ****ed. They have no depth all their bench is aging and getting old and fragile. To make the whole season un injured and expect to beat all these younger better teams is far fetched.

[Rashidi]

I do feel sorry for the spurs though....They never get any credit, never get any ink, never get any love..theyre not on espn, tnt, abc as much as lakers, cavs, rockets..duncan's a 4x champ, 2x mvp and he doesnt get enough love from media, fans because he is "boring"...................... I respect what the spurs have done..had manu not been injured in the WCF vs lakers...it wouldve been interesting

The Spurs are on ABC plenty. Eva Longoria gets more airtime than she does in her own show.

The Lakers are the league's most popular team, not tough to see why they're the most televised.

The Spurs are not a popular team and not a popular city. New York, Cleveland, Miami, Boston, LA, Dallas, Houston, these are all sports cities with lots of sports fans around the country. San Antonio doesn't fit the bill.

Another thing is three of their starters are not from the country (Parker, Ginobili, Oberto). There are many fans who are NCAA fans and follow a players career. Like for instance, someone who is a North Carolina fan will follow NC players through their NBA careers, which inevitably leads them to liking other players on their team, and following their careers. Since the Spurs have gone the international route they aren't drafting many popular players people have been following (and since they usually win, they are drafting lesser knowns at the end of the first/second round anyway).

It also doesn't help that the Spurs are percieved as a dirty team. Bruce Bowen might be an effective player, but he sure doesn't have many fans. And the whole Robert Horry cheap shot on Nash really set the Spurs image back a few years. So really, Spurs fans only consist of

1. San Antonio locals, Duncan fans
2. Front runners/bandwagoners who only stick with winning teams
3. Overseas fans keeping track of their favorite players via the net but can't watch american tv or attend american games.
4. Fans who have grown to like Ginobli and Parker because of their playing style (uncoincidentally, a majority of these fans likely had hate for the Lakers that pre-dated these players)
5. Fans who appreciate good defense and "playing the right way" enough to ignore the flopping and cheap shots
6. Anyone who wants to see Eva Longoria at a basketball game.

[mcgradybunch]

hey rashidi..whatss pietrus' def ratings gonna be? on ball d, speed, def aware?

[Rashidi]

Celtics will most likley be in finals if spurs made it there.

Right, but they don't have to go through them to make the playoffs or get to the Finals. There are eight 50 win teams in the west. The Celtics don't feel like they are competing with the Spurs, that's for sure.

Posey>Pargo.

And is that enough to push them over the hump?

Rockets are undoubtly already major contenders.

They've been saying this about Houston since McGrady came to town. There is probably a 50/50 chance that Artest doesn't help and they trade him at the deadline.

Rockets have arguably the 2 best defenders in the NBA.

And unfortunately, they both play the same position. Makes for a great video game lineup, but real life?

Lakers will obviously be better with bynum.

Oh right, like the Suns will obviously be better with Shaq. Frontline quickness is one of the edges LA had in the playoffs. The league is shying away from bigger players like Bynum, who notably has a relatively small sample size of success (35 games of Kobe getting him shots and he's a godsend?). Gasol is getting those touches now, and Odom is not exactly suited for the perimeter. The NBA is not a video game where you can put together a high rated team and simulate the season and win the championship. You need pieces that fit together. Bynum is bigger and a better defensive player than Gasol. But better than Odom? We'll see.

It's like the Knicks, you can get all the former 20 ppg scorers you want, but you're not going to be able to make them all score 20 ppg in the same season. See how well Eddy Curry adapts to not being the featured post player.

[StEpHoN_mArBuRy]

The Lakers situation is alittle different seeeing as Pau Gasol is actually a willing passer however. On the Knicks neither Zach nor Eddy now how to pass the ball.

[Rashidi]

We'll see. Only time will tell. But ill tell you the truth: Spurs love to be the underdog year after year. We'll see, just we'll see. I dont eat that theory: younger athletics teams will kill old Spurs. Yeah,, maybe im wrong, because Cavs swept Spurs in 4, and last year, everybody saw how Hornets beat the Spurs, and how the high tempo Suns beat Spurs year after year (lol lol lol sarcasm ). Thanks God Manu was injured in LAL/SAS playoff. But i repeat: we are just placing personal BIASED opinions in here. And of course, i cant expect some nice projections on the most hated team "Spurs", the team everybody called "boring". So, no wonder they are never Top contender. So thats life !!! Thats the price.

The Spurs dominate teams that aren't as good as they are (Cleveland, New Jersey, whoever their first round matchup has been over the last decade), but against similarly talented teams it is just about always a dogfight. It sure seems like the Spurs get taken to game 7 more than any other team. They could not guard the Mavericks in 2006, and they barely escaped the Hornets in 2008, before losing to the Lakers. It took Robert Horry heroics to avoid losing in 2005. They were in for another 7 game series against Phoenix in 2007 before Horry worked his magic there. It's not like the Spurs were considered underdogs going into any of these series either.

The Spurs have two weaknesses. Quick PGs, and quick big men.
The Suns did have both of those, but they also got killed on the boards every game because they played a smaller lineup (and one with little interior defense to boot). Hornets couldn't stop Paul from penetrating, couldn't stop West/Chandler's quickness inside, and couldn't outrebound that duo either. It should be noted that Duncan is the only post scorer on the team so if he doesn't have an advantage there it's going to make for a long series... the teams that have hung with the Spurs were able to take that away AND use their quickness advantage against Timmy and actually expose him on defense a bit.

[NorcalBalla23]

Right, but they don't have to go through them to make the playoffs or get to the Finals. There are eight 50 win teams in the west. The Celtics don't feel like they are competing with the Spurs, that's for sure.


And is that enough to push them over the hump?

Yep. Hornets players improve and with bonzi and posey off the bench its a better team then the spurs who are aging and getting injured (manu).

They've been saying this about Houston since McGrady came to town. There is probably a 50/50 chance that Artest doesn't help and they trade him at the deadline.

Just like adding bynum wont help LA huh? LOL

And unfortunately, they both play the same position. Makes for a great video game lineup, but real life?

Makes a great defensive team.

[Rashidi]

The Lakers situation is alittle different seeeing as Pau Gasol is actually a willing passer however. On the Knicks neither Zach nor Eddy now how to pass the ball.

They also Odom, another willing passer. The problem with Bynum is that he turns Odom into a non-factor. It was Odom who was the willing passer and Gasol who was the finisher in 2008. What's going to happen with Gasol taking Odom's role? The Lakers need perimeter shooting to space the floor. They start Radmanovic, and back him up with Walton and Vujacic. Perimeter shooting is not Odom's strength, nor is he a great perimeter defender, and while he blows by PFs, it's tough to see him doing this to SFs on a regular basis. Without that perimeter spacing, it's much easier to collapse the defense on the big men and even Kobe. Not to mention that the Lakers were a breaking uptempo team last year once Gasol showed up, and a Gasol/Bynum frontline is considerably slower than Odom/Gasol.

On paper they are a better team, but it remains to be seen how the pieces will fit. Odom could be traded if it doesn't work out, or the team could decide to give Bynum a bench role in favor of last year's frontline (which would also help keep Bynum out of foul trouble and would avoid pushing him too hard post surgery).

[Rashidi]

Yep. Hornets players improve and with bonzi and posey off the bench its a better team then the spurs who are aging and getting injured (manu).

Thanks for reminding me. The Hornets aren't bringing Bonzi back, he's a free agent and they gave his spot to Posey.

So they lost two bench players and gained one. How exactly have they improved again? If Mike James doesn't produce, they have no offensive spark coming off the bench.

And last I checked, Peja Stojakovic has had more injury problems in the last three years than any of the Spurs players have had in that same time period. So please, get to the part where you actually explain how the Hornets are improved. They added Posey to a bench that already has Julian Wright and Rasual Butler. Sca-ree.


Just like adding bynum wont help LA huh? LOL

If you'd care to explain how Odom fits on this team, be my guest.



Makes a great defensive team.

Since you obviously know so much about how these players will fit on the court together, would you care to tell me which of them is the better off-ball defender, which of them is best suited to guarding a quick guard like Manu, and which is best suited to guarding a taller post player? (And do try to answer each with more than one sentence).

I won't be holding my breath.

[NorcalBalla23]

Thanks for reminding me. The Hornets aren't bringing Bonzi back, he's a free agent and they gave his spot to Posey.

So they lost two bench players and gained one. How exactly have they improved again? If Mike James doesn't produce, they have no offensive spark coming off the bench.

And last I checked, Peja Stojakovic has had more injury problems in the last three years than any of the Spurs players have had in that same time period. So please, get to the part where you actually explain how the Hornets are improved. They added Posey to a bench that already has Julian Wright and Rasual Butler. Sca-ree.




If you'd care to explain how Odom fits on this team, be my guest.





Since you obviously know so much about how these players will fit on the court together, would you care to tell me which of them is the better off-ball defender, which of them is best suited to guarding a quick guard like Manu, and which is best suited to guarding a taller post player? (And do try to answer each with more than one sentence).

I won't be holding my breath.

LMAO. Your arguing with me how the rockets and lakers will be WORSE with bynum and artest. Your a fool who doesnt know anything. You add artest its a better team. You add bynum better team.

[GoodOiledMachine]

The Spurs dominate teams that aren't as good as they are (Cleveland, New Jersey, whoever their first round matchup has been over the last decade), but against similarly talented teams it is just about always a dogfight. It sure seems like the Spurs get taken to game 7 more than any other team. They could not guard the Mavericks in 2006, and they barely escaped the Hornets in 2008, before losing to the Lakers. It took Robert Horry heroics to avoid losing in 2005. They were in for another 7 game series against Phoenix in 2007 before Horry worked his magic there. It's not like the Spurs were considered underdogs going into any of these series either.

The Spurs have two weaknesses. Quick PGs, and quick big men.
The Suns did have both of those, but they also got killed on the boards every game because they played a smaller lineup (and one with little interior defense to boot). Hornets couldn't stop Paul from penetrating, couldn't stop West/Chandler's quickness inside, and couldn't outrebound that duo either. It should be noted that Duncan is the only post scorer on the team so if he doesn't have an advantage there it's going to make for a long series... the teams that have hung with the Spurs were able to take that away AND use their quickness advantage against Timmy and actually expose him on defense a bit.

All the little respect i had about you, its gone. NO credibility at all. Dude, you are very unbiased, and its evident you are a Lakers fan or a Suns fan or a Hornets fan.
Ok, your first statment: Just because Spurs couldnt guard MAVS in 2006, they are not good enough? lol lol How many RINGS Mavs have? ZERO !!!!!!! So thats mean Spurs are not great? Dude, that was in 2006, and Spurs were CHAMPS in 2005 (one year before) and 2007 (one year later). Mavs are being eliminated in the 1st round two years in a row. Deal with it.
Then your other funny statement: Spurs Championships over Nets and over Cavs are not valuable because they were NJ and CAVS.:rotfl: :rotfl: OMG !!!!!!!!!! What an empty comment. !!!!! Its like saying: "Celtics dominated Lakers last Finals because Lakers aren't good as they are...lol lol lol Of course LAL werent good as BOS are. Thats why Boston won. Thats the goal: being better than your competition. So, Spurs were better than competition in 99, 03, 05, 07,,,and you dont give credit because competition werent good as Spurs????? In 2007, nobody couldn't stop Lebron in the EAST playoffs, untill he faced Bowen and Corporation. No credit for the Spurs after that sweet, delicious, and nasty sweep??? Stopping the man who was unstoppable in the EAST???? Then the 2003 Nets, one of the hottest EAST team of those years, and no credit for the Spurs????? If Spurs won the RINGS in 99, 03, 05, 07 is because the stopped the competition in the West, and killed the BEST team in the EAST. And i say: best team in the East, because they were EAST Conference Champions. lol lol OMG,,,one of the dumbest statement EVER.

Then your following statements: "Spurs barely escaped Hornets in last season"? lol lol lol another funny statement. :rotfl: :rotfl: . Spurs won, deal with it. So, Spurs win is not good because it was in 7 game. So what??????? Deal with it. Smart players won over younger athletic guys. Thats called: adjusments on the road, baby !!!!!

And then the most stupid airhead comment : "it tooks Horry heroics to avoid losing in 2005" lol lol lol :rotfl: :rotfl: So what??? They won another RING, and thats what matter. And, did Horry foul Nash in 2008? yea rite!!!!!!!!,,,,Spurs killed them because they can NOT defend TIM Duncan and because Spurs are way better than Suns hands down. By the way, what kind of excuse you r gonna make for last playoff SAS/PHX series? How Spurs won? it doesnt matter if were Manu, or Horry or Tim or Tony,,,they are a team !!!!! So, it seems you dont give credit to Spurs because they always won by one reason or another????
They just won because they were the best team in their respective Championship year. You seem you are making excuses for every Spurs RINGS. A Championship is a Championship. Learn that. The fact is: when Spurs are not Champ, they reached West Conf. Finals at least. So, stop hating. Man, you are a Spurs hater, you are unbiased, so thats why we can't respect your opinion. I repeat, your little credibility, its gone for me.

[jayrivera3]

I believe the Lakers trio of Lamar Odom, Pau Gasol, and Andrew Bynum will become the most formidable front line in the NBA. Atleast 2K thinks so.

Last years ratings were crazy for that tandem if you average them out. You don't have to worry about having to guard those types of players like Manu, Pierce, etc..Ariza can do that if called upon. He's not going to shut down any volume scorer like the ones mentioned but itll be enough to spell the trio some rest and won't matter if they have to guard him.

Those 3 players can play at an Olympic level. They put so much pressure on you. That 3 is more imposing than the the lineups of these teams' star SF's and C's:
Boston: (Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett is as good as it gets I'm not too sold on Kedrick Perkins yet,
San Antonio: Tim Duncan is still Tim Duncan but who else is there?
Dallas: Dirk and Josh Howard can put points on the board but can Erik Dampier keep them honest enough to compete with the best? Nope.
Philadelphia: Brand and AI will keep things competitive but Dalembert won't be their to save them when it counts.
Detroit: Wallace ain't gettin any quicker and that's all they've have as far as a defensive big man stopper.
Torontos: Lineup is intriguing with 2 accomplished low/high post scorers but it doesn't really mean much cuz you just know Jermaine's going to go down eventually during the season.

It's going to be a repeat of last year with the same results unless Bynum can play 34 minutes in the Finals, then the Lakers have a shot at winning the title.

If you throw out Bynum's 1st game (just 19 minutes off the bench) and last game (just 20 minutes before getting hurt) of '07-08, he averaged an impressive 13.5 points on 64.1% FG, 10.4 rebounds, and 2.15 blocks in just 29.4 mpg. Bynum was 3rd in dunks per game behind Dwight & Amare, and he would have led the league in FG% if he qualified. He's still just 20 years old, and with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar giving him tutelage, his offensive output could improve by leaps and bounds in the future. - Eric Wong (Roto Evil)

[Rashidi]

LMAO. Your arguing with me how the rockets and lakers will be WORSE with bynum and artest. Your a fool who doesnt know anything. You add artest its a better team. You add bynum better team.

How many winning teams has Artest been apart of again?

Oh yeah.

One.

[jayrivera3]

If he's unbiased how can he be a Lakers fan. If he was a Lakers fan he would still be unbiased so it doesn't matter anyways.
If your saying the Spurs have a shot at winning the title, you are right. That's all they have is a shot and not a good one at that.

Besides Timmy, I don't see anyone else that can scare any of the 3 best players from the front court of the Lakers or Celtics.
If Duncan and Bynum can repeat last years stats and Manu can stay healthy it'll be a Lakers vs Spurs WCF showdown again.
If i did a poll more than 75 percent would say Lakers.
It's not that we don't like the Lakers, though many of us don't it seems, Pau Gasol is that good. You add in guys like Bynum and Odom, (both on any given night can give you 14-19 points) and suddenly you are like okay who are we going to double team. Yes both command double teams.
Everyone knows the Lakers are going to advance and it's not because of Andrew Bynum.
Stop saying the Spurs have a shot at winning the title.
Celtics vs Lakers is the match-up everyone knows is going to happen which is why I can't wait till they play.

[GoodOiledMachine]

If he's unbiased how can he be a Lakers fan. If he was a Lakers fan he would still be unbiased so it doesn't matter anyways.
If your saying the Spurs have a shot at winning title, you are right. That's all they have is a shot and not a good one at that.
Besides Timmy, I don't see anyone else that can scare any of the 3 best players from the front court of the Lakers.
If Duncan and Bynum can repeat last years stats and Manu can stay healthy it'll be a Lakers vs Spurs WCF showdown again.
If i did a poll more than 75 percent would say Lakers.
It's not that we don't like the Lakers, though many of us don't it seems, Pau Gasol is that good. You add in guys like Bynum and Odom, (both on any given night can give you 14-19 points) and suddenly you are like okay who are we going to double team. Yes both command double teams.
Everyone knows the Lakers are going to advance and it's not because of Andrew Bynum.
Stop saying the Spurs have a shot at winning the title.
Celtics vs Lakers is the match-up everyone knows is going to happen which is why I can't wait till they play.

Are you saying me "stop saying Spurs have a shot at winning title" ? :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: These kids are too funny? :rotfl: :rotfl: I dont cease to be amazed by the hundreds of kids learning the rights of the democracy lol Its hillarious.

[jayrivera3]

Are you saying me "stop saying Spurs have a shot at winning title" ? :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: These kids are too funny? :rotfl: :rotfl: I dont cease to be amazed by the hundreds of kids learning the rights of the democracy lol Its hillarious.


I'm not saying you any of those aforementioned things to you, what are you saying me though?

[Rashidi]

All the little respect i had about you, its gone. NO credibility at all. Dude, you are very unbiased, and its evident you are a Lakers fan or a Suns fan or a Hornets fan.

None of the above. In fact, if read any posts that didn't relate to the Spurs you'd notice I've been critical of both the Lakers and Hornets.


Ok, your first statment: Just because Spurs couldnt guard MAVS in 2006, they are not good enough?

I am explaining to you what the Spurs weaknesses are. You are the one who is getting emotional and excited about it, like the Spurs are a flawless unbeatable team (if they were, they just might have gone back to back). The Spurs' weaknesses (quickness) is not something that gets better with age.


lol lol How many RINGS Mavs have? ZERO !!!!!!! So thats mean Spurs are not great?

I could care less how many rings a team has. The past and the future are two seperate things. People used to ask how many rings Garnett had.


Then your other funny statement: Spurs Championships over Nets and over Cavs are not valuable because they were NJ and CAVS .:rotfl: :rotfl: OMG !!!!!!!!!!

Please learn some elementary reading skills if you're going to act like a pre-teen. I said the Spurs typically steamroll lesser teams. When did I say their championships were not as valuable? Please try to avoid making things up. It's bad for your credibility.


In 2007, nobody couldn't stop Lebron in the EAST playoffs, untill he faced Bowen and Corporation. No credit for the Spurs after that sweet, delicious, and nasty sweep???

LeBron had a very easy road through the playoffs. They dispatched a 7th seed (no Arenas or Butler) in round 1, and a 6th seed (RJ returning from surgery) in round 2. That they made the Finals was a fluke more than anything. There are very few people who expected them to compete with the Spurs, much less win the series.

Most of this decade, the battle between the NBA's top two teams has been the Western Conference Finals, not the NBA Finals. I hope you're not trying to dispute that. The Cavs weren't expected to win more than one game, and they didn't win any at all. Beating them isn't the same accomplishment as beating a 60 win Suns team in the playoffs (suspensions notwithstanding).

Sweet, delicious, nasty? This wasn't the 2008 Celtics getting swept. This was a team that didn't belong in the same breath as San Antonio. Even the 8th seed Warriors probably would have beaten Cleveland. Try to be just a little bit reasonable.

Then the 2003 Nets, one of the hottest EAST team of those years, and no credit for the Spurs?????

Well, re-read your statement. You lost us at "hottest east team". That's like bragging your girlfriend is the least ugliest.



Then your following statements: "Spurs barely escaped Hornets in last season"? lol lol lol another funny statement. :rotfl: :rotfl: . Spurs won, deal with it. So, Spurs win is not good because it was in 7 game. So what??????? Deal with it. Smart players won over younger athletic guys. Thats called: adjusments on the road, baby !!!!!

You generally seem to be missing the point, and are getting emotional because you don't like the truths that I've brought. The Spurs either dominate or they struggle. There isn't really an in-between. Yes, it took them 7 games to put away the Hornets last year. You can't see the difference between that and if they had swept them?

And, did Horry foul Nash in 2008? yea rite!!!!!!!!

No, he was busy fouling Shaq. (oh snap. am I implying that 2008 =/= 2007? or am i rolling my eyes as you avoid discussing what happened in 2007? The world may never know).


By the way, what kind of excuse you r gonna make for last playoff SAS/PHX series? How Spurs won?

I dunno. Probably the same stuff you'd say if I asked you why the Spurs haven't gone back to back.


Man, you are a Spurs hater, you are unbiased, so thats why we can't respect your opinion. I repeat, your little credibility, its gone for me.

Um, I'm sorry, I'm laughing right now, because this is the second time you've called me unbiased. I let it slide in the beginning because I figured it was a typo. You DO know what the word means, right?

Newsflash: Nobody is forcing you to respect me. You're the one who gave me that when you started crowing about how amazing my ratings were bc the Spurs were #1. I don't need the respect of fanboys, homers, hypocrites, or internet trolls to know I have very partial and well-thought views on the NBA. I could talk about all 30 teams with ease, whereas you seem to have the makeup of the average Yankee fan (WE WIN ALLWAYS WHOCARES BOUT REST OF BAYSEBALL)

[Rashidi]

I'm not saying you any of those aforementioned things to you, what are you saying me though?

He seems to be having conversations in his own head.

[Stilesy]

Hey Rashidi, I couldn't find if you posted this or not but how much does the Spurs rating change if you start Mike Finley and bring Manu off the bench as 6th man, which is a likely scenario this season.

Also just a general question. You know so much about all of the NBA players (even the obscure ones). Do you watch a lot of tape for all of the teams or base a lot of it off statistics? Or a combination of both.

And a big WTF at all the guys slamming your ratings. You're trying to do the 2k community a service for free (which I have been enjoying since 2k5) and they seem to want/expect more. Even Shane Battier is satisfied.

[jayrivera3]

He seems to be having conversations in his own head.

Are you saying me this?

[Stizz]

Are you saying me this?
Is this meant to say, "Are you saying this to me?"?

[jayrivera3]

Is this meant to say, "Are you saying this to me?"?


Yes. Somebody had made a "typo" and I was just running with it.

I know how to write somewhat. That's too blatant not to notice.

[Sharpshooter23]

Is this the same guy who gave David West a rating of 82? Rondo a rating of 72 and Turkoglu 77?

[Sharpshooter23]

WTF the Hornets and especially the Rockets are a better defensive team than the Lakers

[UB40]

lol at jayrivera3...

he still lost

[Rashidi]

Is this the same guy who gave David West a rating of 82? Rondo a rating of 72 and Turkoglu 77?

No, that would be whoever works at 2k.

[Rashidi]

WTF the Hornets and especially the Rockets are a better defensive team than the Lakers

All five Lakers players are solid to good defensive players.

It was mentioned in the threat that Scola brings Houston's defensive rating down a bit. They have a deep defensive bench and starters count far more toward team rating than the bench does.

And pretty obviously, Peja Stojakovic is not a good defensive player and likewise drags the Hornets rating down a bit.

If I put Bynum on the injured reserve, and start Radmanovic, ala 2008, then the Lakers have a mediocre defensive rating.

[Rashidi]

Are you saying me this?

Nope. I think.

[Rashidi]

Hey Rashidi, I couldn't find if you posted this or not but how much does the Spurs rating change if you start Mike Finley and bring Manu off the bench as 6th man, which is a likely scenario this season.

That's something I need to switch next time I put the game in. From what I remember, as long as Manu's in the 6 spot it doesn't really change much.

Also just a general question. You know so much about all of the NBA players (even the obscure ones). Do you watch a lot of tape for all of the teams or base a lot of it off statistics? Or a combination of both.

Lots of tape, lots of stats, lots of reading. Thanks to the internet there are plenty of resources available to help you keep up with all the various fringe players (I remember Harold Miner vanished from the NBA to never be heard from again. Newspapers and NBA broadcasts didn't exactly let you know a player was going to Europe) This is going to be my 15th year watching the NBA, so I've been watching all of these players since they first entered the league. I watched Cassell get his 1st ring, which makes me feel a bit old now that I think about it.

[NorcalBalla23]

How many winning teams has Artest been apart of again?

Oh yeah.

One.

WTF?! Artest went to a loaded rockets team who before only had 2 players to rely on to score. They have a big 3 now and are deeper then ever! LOL.

[Rashidi]

WTF?! Artest went to a loaded rockets team who before only had 2 players to rely on to score. They have a big 3 now and are deeper then ever! LOL.

Artest isn't an efficient scorer. The Rockets aren't going to succeed if he's taking lots of shots. There really isn't a fit for him as he's a jack of all trades, master of none on the offense. He's not a better shooter than Battier, not a better ball handler or slasher than T-Mac, not a better post scorer than Yao or even Scola. Artest does all of those things moderately well, but not better than other players on the team.

Bruce Bowen, Tayshaun Prince, Shane Battier, Raja Bell, these guys are all effective role players because they don't need the ball on offense and can score efficiently. 40% from 3pt is equivalent to 60% from 2pt. The Rockets don't need a volume scorer as they already have two very good ones.

Also, Artest does not equal a big three. KG, Pierce, and Allen are multiple time all-stars, multiple time all-nba selects, and future hall of famers. Artest is a one time all-star and it's not because of his personality. The Rockets don't have a big three; they have a big two plus Artest. (if you're gonna compare them, might as well talk about Nash, Amare, and Shaq - all of whom have gotten past the first round of the playoffs with regularity).

He is a marginal upgrade over Battier on defense (if at all), and a downgrade on offense even if he scores more points than Battier did last year.

[PowerfulSkyking]

i think Artest rebounds better than battier tho im probly wrong

[NorcalBalla23]

Artest isn't an efficient scorer. The Rockets aren't going to succeed if he's taking lots of shots. There really isn't a fit for him as he's a jack of all trades, master of none on the offense. He's not a better shooter than Battier, not a better ball handler or slasher than T-Mac, not a better post scorer than Yao or even Scola. Artest does all of those things moderately well, but not better than other players on the team.

Bruce Bowen, Tayshaun Prince, Shane Battier, Raja Bell, these guys are all effective role players because they don't need the ball on offense and can score efficiently. 40% from 3pt is equivalent to 60% from 2pt. The Rockets don't need a volume scorer as they already have two very good ones.

Also, Artest does not equal a big three. KG, Pierce, and Allen are multiple time all-stars, multiple time all-nba selects, and future hall of famers. Artest is a one time all-star and it's not because of his personality. The Rockets don't have a big three; they have a big two plus Artest. (if you're gonna compare them, might as well talk about Nash, Amare, and Shaq - all of whom have gotten past the first round of the playoffs with regularity).

He is a marginal upgrade over Battier on defense (if at all), and a downgrade on offense even if he scores more points than Battier did last year.

Hey rashidi. So what are you saying? That the rockets will suck next year? huh? ok.

[Rashidi]

Hey rashidi. So what are you saying? That the rockets will suck next year? huh? ok.

Did I say that? No.
Doesn't mean they are gonna be a 65 win team.
They are just trying to hang with the competition. There is a high likelyhood each player misses at least 10 games.

[NorcalBalla23]

Did I say that? No.
Doesn't mean they are gonna be a 65 win team.

LOL. I never said they would be. But i say they undoubtedly will be on the top of the west conference. Top 3.

[Rashidi]

LOL. I never said they would be. But i say they undoubtedly will be on the top of the west conference. Top 3.

So the Rockets are without a doubt better all but two of these teams: the Lakers, Suns, Spurs, Hornets, Jazz, Mavericks, Blazers.

Really. Without a doubt?

I smell a financial wager.

[NorcalBalla23]

So the Rockets are without a doubt better all but two of these teams: the Lakers, Suns, Spurs, Hornets, Jazz, Mavericks, Blazers.

Really. Without a doubt?

I smell a financial wager.

Yep!. Without a doubt! they will be in top 3 by the end of the season. Im confident saying that.

[ClutchLikeKobe]

Mad props to the man who took way to much time to do this so we could read about BS ratings in a basketball game. Naw im just playing, top 5 easy.
-Celtics
-SPURS
-Lakers
-Suns
-Pistons

[AntDawg]

How is detroit's offense only 74??? All 5 starters can score over 10 a game... then we have bench players that can score...It would be 80 at the very least imo.

[Rashidi]

How is detroit's offense only 74??? All 5 starters can score over 10 a game...

How many starters are there in the league that DON'T score 10 a game? They don't have an offensive superstar.

then we have bench players that can score...

Their top 3 bench guys are Maxiell, Stuckey, and Afflalo. They aren't any better at scoring than Zaza Pachulia, Maurice Evans, and Flip Murray in Atlanta.

It would be 80 at the very least imo.

You're right. How could I not see that Billups, Rip, Prince, and Sheed are offensively equal to Chris Paul, David West, Peja Stojakovic, and Tyson Chandler. WHAT WAS I THINKING?????????

[Rashidi]

Yep!. Without a doubt! they will be in top 3 by the end of the season. Im confident saying that.

So put your money where your mouth is. Open a paypal account.

[jayrivera3]

What team do you follow Rashidi?

If you had to create a 12 man team to whip someone's butt, who would your team be comprised of?

Which 3 teams have the biggest advantage over any team?

[ksuttonjr76]

That's something I need to switch next time I put the game in. From what I remember, as long as Manu's in the 6 spot it doesn't really change much.



Lots of tape, lots of stats, lots of reading. Thanks to the internet there are plenty of resources available to help you keep up with all the various fringe players (I remember Harold Miner vanished from the NBA to never be heard from again. Newspapers and NBA broadcasts didn't exactly let you know a player was going to Europe) This is going to be my 15th year watching the NBA, so I've been watching all of these players since they first entered the league. I watched Cassell get his 1st ring, which makes me feel a bit old now that I think about it.
I was wondering how you come across your stats/assessments/predictations. D*mn, now I feel old. I've been watching basketball since the late 80's, and I learned to appericate the game more when Indiana was battling teams in the 90's.

As for everyone else, I was going to comment on the whole Lakers/Spurs/Hornets team, but everything that I've wanted to say has already been said. However, here's my two cents...

Spurs - Honestly, they kinda do remind me of the Pacers from the 90's. Not really a flashy team, players know their roles, deep-talented bench, and only one superstar who will rise to the challenge. Like the Pacers of the 90's, they will challenge the best teams in the West year after year, but will lose in the semi or conference finals. The team is not getting any younger, nor will they get good drafts due to their yearly, yet consistent success. Being a "small market" team, it will be hard for them to attract dominating players like the Kobes, Lebrons, and Wades of the NBA. The sun is setting on this team, and with time...they will completely dismantle this team ala 90s Bulls.

Lakers - First off, Phil Jackson is a coaching guru, and this team is a complete replicate (sp?) of Jackson's 90's Bulls. Superstar SG, defensive-minded PG, pass-first SF, a comparable slightly better offensive PF (some can argue Horace Grant and Dennis Rodman to be better due to their defense and toughness), center by committee, and quick impact bench players. Truth be told, this is the team to beat however Jackson has the unfortunate timing of coaching in a overall better conference when compared to the Eastern conference during the 90's. This team will have a tougher road ahead of them, and it will strictly comes down to...will this team have enough heart to overcome "fatigue" to beat the Celtics? Although the Eastern conference is arguably better, the eastern conference is not a wear and tear conference, hence the ECF winner will have the advantage of "freshness". Having reached the hyped NBA Finals as the favorites, only to be embarrassed by the Celtics...this team will be hungry and more focused.

Hornets - I'm not completely convinced this team is ready nor will they every reach the NBA Finals. They're young and talented, but in 2-3 years they will lose some impactful players in Peja, Wells, and Posey due to age. I feel that they will contend every year, however what most fans can attest to is that you need more than one superstar to reach and win the NBA Finals (Pistons being the only exception in recent memories). They will be to the Lakers, as Atlanta was to the Celtics in the 80's.

Houston - Man, this is a tough one. Being an Indiana Pacers fan, Artest can make or break your team with his attitude. There's no denying his defense, toughness, and reasonable offense, but Artest has "Handle With Care" stamped on his forehead and one can distinctively hear a soft *tick tick tick tick tick tick tick* each time he walks on the court.

[jayrivera3]

Sutton, You have been watching the NBA for years now and must know that the Western Conference is tougher than the Easter Conference. Last year WC teams wondered if they'd make the playoffs and these were 50 win teams.

[ksuttonjr76]

Sutton, You have been watching the NBA for years now and must know that the Western Conference is tougher than the Easter Conference. Last year WC teams wondered if they'd make the playoffs and these were 50 win teams.

See my opinion for the Lakers...I already addressed that point.

[PSL1]

i think power will be a bit more balanced now with the new and improved sixers, heat, clippers, raptors, and sort of cavs

[Nicotrel]

Do you know a rating that should be added Rashidi?

[Diddy1988315]

are these ratings official?

and if so, can u explain why allen iverson has dropped to a 92?

its really sad how much he is underrated now, his skills have gone nowhere

[NorcalBalla23]

are these ratings official?

and if so, can u explain why allen iverson has dropped to a 92?

its really sad how much he is underrated now, his skills have gone nowhere

Ya tru AI is still a beast.

[Diddy1988315]

and also, melo is one of the best midrange shooters in the nba. his mid dropped to 86???? huh???

[Rashidi]

are these ratings official?

and if so, can u explain why allen iverson has dropped to a 92?

its really sad how much he is underrated now, his skills have gone nowhere

That's actually a typo, he's still a 93.

[Rashidi]

and also, melo is one of the best midrange shooters in the nba. his mid dropped to 86???? huh???

At an 86 he is one of the best mid-range shooters in the NBA. He doesn't deserve a rating in the 90s, his shot isn't Dirk-level. (and his shot seems to alternate between good and bad every year)

[Rashidi]

i think power will be a bit more balanced now with the new and improved sixers, heat, clippers, raptors, and sort of cavs

Clippers are a west team.

The Raptors should be good, borderline contender. They were 45-50 win caliber already and they replaced Rasho with Jermaine O'Neal.

Sixers will be improved but won't be as good as everyone thinks. They will probably top out at around 50 wins provided Brand stays healthy.

Miami I still don't think is a playoff team. They have no PG, no C, and Marion is a lock to get dealt during the year. Udonis Haslem is penciled in as starting center which says it all. And this is before Wade misses an obligatory 10 game minimum.

Wizards should be improved, after playing with a skeleton crew last year. They should be neck and neck with the Cavs again.

[Rashidi]

LMAO my favorite 2k feature strikes again. Just about every team had a boost to their defensive rating without me even touching them.

I turn my game on, add Donyell Marshall to the Sixers, and check the Sixers team rating to see if anything changed. Their defense jumped 3 points. Look at the next team, Blazers offense went down a point and defense up a point. Hornets lose 1 offense, gain 2 defense, same for Lakers, Mavericks, Hornets, Celtics, etc. The Rockets also gained 3 defense without losing any offense (like the Sixers). What likely caused this?

Well, last night I put Manu in the 6th man slot (instead of starting lineup) since he's gonna start the year hurt. Spurs defense went down 3 points, offense by 1 points. So naturally, I check them, and they are right back to 95 defense. I'm telling you, there is something in the programming that will raise the Spurs to 95 defense or the Suns to 95 offense no matter what. They dropped in rating and the game fixes this by giving every other team a defensive boost to justify them going back up. And even funnier is the Spurs offense went down a point when I benched Manu, so the game took it upon itself to lower the offensive rating of half the teams by a point.

Here's the "new" ranking, courtesy of "not me".

EAST
Celtics 79 Offense, 93 Defense, 84 Overall (86.0)
Raptors 85 Offense, 80 Defense, 83 Overall (82.5)
Pistons 74 Offense, 89 Defense, 86 Overall (81.5)
76ers 64 Offense, 91 Defense, 78 Overall (77.5)
Wizards 80 Offense, 72 Defense, 74 Overall (76.0)
Cavaliers 61 Offense, 86 Defense, 66 Overall (73.5)
Bobcats 64 Offense, 83 Defense, 67 Overall (73.5)
Magic 73 Offense, 73 Defense, 73 Overall (73.0)
Hawks 68 Offense,75 Defense, 72 Overall (71.5)
Bucks 74 Offense, 61 Defense, 65 Overall (67.5)
Heat 63 Offense, 70 Defense, 64 Overall (66.5)
Bulls 57 Offense, 75 Defense, 73 Overall (66.0)
Knicks 76 Offense, 55 Defense, 61 Overall (65.5)
Nets 63 Offense, 67 Defense, 65 Overall (65.0)
Pacers 63 Offense, 62 Defense, 62 Overall (62.5)

WEST
Lakers 83 Offense, 89 Defense, 86 Overall (86.0)
Rockets 83 Offense, 89 Defense, 87 Overall (86.0)
Mavericks 85 Offense, 84 Defense, 85 Overall (84.5)
Jazz 81 Offense, 86 Defense, 82 Overall (83.5)
Suns 95 Offense, 71 Defense, 90 Overall (83.0)
Spurs 67 Offense, 95 Defense, 92 Overall (81.0)
Hornets 80 Offense, 81 Defense, 80 Overall (80.5)
Nuggets 73 Offense, 76 Defense, 76 Overall (74.5)
Clippers 60 Offense, 82 Defense, 71 Overall (71.0)
Blazers 63 Offense, 75 Defense, 69 Overall (69.0)
T’Wolves 73 Offense, 57 Defense, 72 Overall (65.0)
Grizzlies 55 Offense, 70 Defense, 59 Overall (62.5)
Warriors 57 Offense, 66 Defense, 63 Overall (61.5)
Thunder 59 Offense, 63 Defense, 61 Overall (61.0)
Kings 56 Offense, 61 Defense, 60 Overall (58.5)

While we're here
Offense
90s: 1 team
80s: 7 teams
70s: 7 teams
60s: 10 teams
50s: 5 teams

Half the teams with a rating less than 70? 20 teams with a rating less than 75??? Suns with a +10 advantage over next closest team? The above is the exact reason why.

Defense
90s: 3 teams
80s: 10 teams
70s: 9 teams
60s: 6 teams
50s: 2 teams

Polar opposites much? Only 8 teams with a rating under 70, half of the offense. That'll happen when you've got faulty programming screwing with ****.

[Diddy1988315]

respect to all your ratings and what not, but u got my main guys wrong, not trying to sound bias. carmelo needs to have a 92 mid at very least. he has gotten a lot better at shooting over the years, so putting his mid down, especially by that much, makes no sense.

and in regards to ai, his mid should be 89-90, like how u had it in ur 2k6 ratings. he shoots more mids now then he did in philly, and his FG% is way higher, yet u drop it to 84. again, im lost at that:confused:

reply please.

[Rashidi]

respect to all your ratings and what not, but u got my main guys wrong, not trying to sound bias. carmelo needs to have a 92 mid at very least. he has gotten a lot better at shooting over the years, so putting his mid down, especially by that much, makes no sense.

and in regards to ai, his mid should be 89-90, like how u had it in ur 2k6 ratings. he shoots more mids now then he did in philly, and his FG% is way higher, yet u drop it to 84. again, im lost at that:confused:

reply please.

Iverson
2008: 149-359 (.415)
2007: 124-318 (.389)
2006: 180-478 (.376)
2005: 172-458 (.375)
Total: 625-1613 (.387)

Iverson had his best year percentage wise though he did take fewer attempts than the past (2007 he didn't play as many games as he sat out until the trade). Either way he's not a high percentage shooter, and to be fair, his speed, handles, and quickness probably have more to do with his shooting percentages than his shooting ability (since they allow him to get better shots).

And I don't care what I rated him in 2006. I didn't have this data available to me back then, and 2k has changed their own ratings schemes over the years anyway. I had Kobe rated a 94 back then and I've got him at an 86 now.

I should note that Iverson's 84 was before I had his mid-range data. He got an 84 based on his season, but after obtaining the data I lowered him to an 81. I can't in good conscience give him that high a rating with three sub .400 seasons. His numbers even for this year are blown away by other shot happy guards like Monta Ellis (44%) or Maurice Williams (52%).

B. Roy
2008: 157-355 (.442) - missed 8 games and didn't play for highest pace team in league
2007: 83-172 (.482) - missed 25 games
Total: 240-527 (.455)

Even if we only take Iverson's most recent numbers (last 2 yrs) thats 273-677. It took 150 more shots than Roy and only made 33. Roy missed 33 games to Iverson's 17 so it's not like Iverson was jacking up more per game to account for the attempt difference either.

C. Anthony
2008: 190-422 (.450)
2007: 155-408 (.379)
2006: 228-532 (.428)
2005: 138-375 (.368)
Total: 711-1737 (.409)

Melo seems to alternate between good shooter and bad shooter. He had his best year in 2008 but it remains to be seen which player he is. An 86 mid is fairly generous considering his four year average.

How's that compare to other mid-range stars?

T. McGrady
2008: 228-531 (.429)
2007: 267-601 (.444)
2006: 164-398 (.412) - Played through a back injury (and missed 30 games)
2005: 267-606 (.440)
Total: 926-2136 (.433)

Denver plays in the highest tempo offense in the league (boosting their cumulative offensive numbers, mind you), and Melo still can't get close to T-Mac, who has 215 more makes despite a slower offense and more injuries. He had a better percentage this year but it should be clear who the more consistent performer is (not to mention the most effective) over the last 4 years.

R. Hamilton
2008: 177-384 (.460)
2007: 136-312 (.435)
2006: 182-422 (.431)
2005: 115-312 (.368)
Total: 610-1430 (.426)

Rip plays for the slowest team in the league, not the fastest. Better percentage every year but 2005 (they tied).

D. Nowitzki
2008: 193-385 (.501)
2007: 239-473 (.505)
2006: 228-480 (.475)
2005: 238-558 (.426)
Total: 898-1896 (.473)

I don't think I need to talk about this one. Actually, maybe I should. Dirk has a 96 Med and has hit 50% of his mid-range shots over the last two years. It seems completely ridiculous to me to have a player who shot 45% and 38% over the last 2 years within 4 points of him.

K. Bryant
2008: 185-492 (.376)
2007: 240-564 (.425)
2006: 302-717 (.421)
2005: 102-264 (.386)
Total: 829-2037 (.406)

He has an 86, just like Melo. If you want me to give Melo a 92 med for what he shot this year, do you also expect me to give Kobe a 78? How can Melo's mid-range be considered low when I have it equal to Kobe's?

[Diddy1988315]

well that ok. i respect ur opinion, just wanted an explanation. but for what its worth ai n melo should both be 86 mid then :)

[Diddy1988315]

how do u get midrange stats though? never seen those stats before

[Rashidi]

well that ok. i respect ur opinion, just wanted an explanation. but for what its worth ai n melo should both be 86 mid then :)

Only if I can make Dirk 106 Mid.

[Diddy1988315]

o come on thats only 2 difference between 84 and 86

[vince94]

Marion was also badly overrated, he has never been a superstar player, which is what a 92 overall is. The fact is there are not many teams where Marion would be considered the best player. #1 guys like Bosh, Boozer, and Brand have 92 overall, and Marion just doesn't compare. He is a 3rd fiddle on a good team (Nash's 60 win Suns), 2nd fiddle on a so-so team (Kidd's 50 win Suns).

PPG and RPG is irrelevant since he spent most of the year in Phoenix's system which inflates both numbers. Even then, 15/10 is not what you expect from a 90 player, you expect 20/10 or even 19/9 like you would from a Gasol or Jermaine type (and needless to say, Marion isn't the presence down low that they are).

The truth is Marion is a limited offensive player who has been able to score thanks to fastbreaks and the great play of his PGs. He is a complete non-factor in a half-court offense. His mid-range game is completely non-existent, he even worse from this range than similar players with reputed shooting deficiencies like Josh Smith or Andrei Kirilenko.

2005-2008 Mid-Range stats
Marion: 121-372 (.325)
DESMOND MASON: 124-378 (.328) (OUCH)
Smith: 281-830 (.338)
Kirilenko: 169-456 (.370)

Hows that compare to some stars with shooting deficiencies?
Wade 2008: 123-334 (.368)
LeBron 2008: 144-389 (.370)

Marion over FOUR YEARS has fewer makes than Wade or LeBron had this year, and his percentage is a whopping 40 points worse. This is inexcusable for a PF, much less a SF.

Hows it compare to Power Forwards?
Amare 2008: 2008: 100-205 (.487)
Boris Diaw 2008: 93-219 (.424) (Ouch. Marion's teammates sure didn't have a problem with this shot).
Aldridge 2008: 144-357 (.403)
Joe Smith 2008: 110-252 (.436) (Double Ouch)
Malik Allen 2008: 100-196 (.510) (Triple Ouch)

But don't fret, Marion did post better numbers than some players out there!

B. Scalabrine
4-Yr Total: 64-201 (.318)

J. Jeffries
4-Yr Total: 65-209 (.311)

(If you still think Marion deserves a 90, I commend your hard head).

Marion rates an 87 as a PF which goes to show he is still a good player, and he played primarily PF for Phoenix. But the truth is he is no longer suited to the SF position, which is where he'll be playing on a team with Beasley and Haslem.

Lamar Odom similarly rates an 85 as a SF but an 88 as a PF. Certain players get worse the further they get from the basket and Marion is one of them. He might have been a great wing when he was younger but he sure isn't one now, on the wrong side of 30.
Ok, I get it. Thanks for the info. :thumbsup:

[ffaacc01]

Marion: I think a 92 is too much but an 86 is too low. He ought to be around 88 or 90. You got to consider some kind of a wide ratings formula (like: 50% last year - 40% the 2 previous years - 10% Clutch & Potential) so no player can be way too over or under rated because of an oddly good or bad year (ex. Maggete, Wade, Marion, Kidd, Calderon, Brand, Arenas, Udrih, Fisher, Sasha, etc ).

[ffaacc01]

The Team ratings code also takes into consideration (OFF & DEF aside) the chemestry and Static. So teams like PHO, S.A., DET, CHA, WAS get a boost on their overall ratings because of that.

Teams like CLE, BOS, PHI, CLI and others, suffer from the too many trades recently made.

So thats an indication that the team ratings codes may be taking a wide approach as should the players ratings do.

[ffaacc01]

Looking at what you posted:
Offense 90s: 1 team - 80s: 7 teams - 70s: 7 teams - 60s: 10 teams - 50s: 5 teams
Defense 90s: 3 teams - 80s: 10 teams - 70s: 9 teams - 60s: 6 teams - 50s: 2 teams

I defenitively agree with you, this is not right. Good defensive teams are as scarce as gold. It is not by fortune the phrase that states: ¨Defense wins championships¨ ... look at DET, MIA, SA, BOS ... there shouldnt be as much as 6 to 8 teams between 90 & 80. On the other hand, this by no reason means that there are few good defensive teams because there are many good offensive teams. I dont see more than 6 to 8 teams too, between ratings of 90 & 80.

The only teams that I see close to the high 80´s ratings are BOS, LK, HOU with some teams on the middle 80´s such as UTA, NO, DET, SA, PHO, ORL and some in the early 80´s and the middle 70´s such as DAL, CLE, TOR ... the rest is between the early 70´s & 60´s. That´s 40% good teams and the rest. Wich is by far more accurate than the actual league classification mode, were 16 (more than 50%) teams are considered good enough to be in the playoffs.

[kanio]

damn i cant believe you actually wrote all that!:eek:
hows your fingers doing ?


Hahaha, exactly what I was thinking!!!
He should have cred though. :)

[Solar Eclipse 2]

These ratings are awful. How can you say the Cavs as a 60 is realistic? That's just not even funny, this is the same team that took Boston to 7 games in their best series of the playoffs, and Mo Williams would have won the cavs that series. That's just not even funny.

[Rashidi]

These ratings are awful. How can you say the Cavs as a 60 is realistic? That's just not even funny, this is the same team that took Boston to 7 games in their best series of the playoffs, and Mo Williams would have won the cavs that series. That's just not even funny.

This topic is months old, and I state VERY CLEARLY in the initial post that the way 2k calculates team overall rating is jacked. Thanks for reading.