A Few More Short NBA 2K15 Video Clips - Knicks vs. Cavs & Lakers/Warriors Ratings

[ojandpizza]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sundown

There's no set of individual ratings that can justify Green at only 1 point higher than Barnes-- Green does practically everything better than jumping straight up. And the new system is supposed to account for that. Basically 3 of 5 of the top starting 5 in the league last season got dinged-- a few in a major way (Iggy and Lee, though Lee's is fair)-- while Barnes got the same stats after a much, much worse season in a system that's supposed to weigh roles better. I mean a player that turned an average defense into a top-3 on a strained hammy gets knocked 5 points, while a player suffering a major injury misses a whole season and still ends up ahead of him by 7 points. Whether individual ratings or the overall system, something is amiss. I'm just a bit dissapointed that these ratings are more reminscent of past 2K rosters than what I had imagined they might be given the new changes.

It's already basically been established that athleticism, see LaVine and Drummond, plays a HUGE role in overalls.. That justifies Barnes being so high, with his potential also included.

That being said it's laughable Drummond is rated higher than Iggy lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sundown]

Quote: Originally Posted by ojandpizza

It's already basically been established that athleticism, see LaVine and Drummond, plays a HUGE role in overalls.. That justifies Barnes being so high, with his potential also included. That being said it's laughable Drummond is rated higher than Iggy lol. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, overrating athleticism has been an age-old problem.


Thing is, Barnes' athleticism itself is a bit overrated (great hops-- underwhelming lateral quickness and footwork). Little actual impact on the court outside of 3-4 highlight dunks a season.


Sigh for Iggy. He was rated pretty well last year (probably too well offensively-- his 3's were cheese and so were his post drives), but the season he finally gets his All-Defensive first team while juicing the Warriors' offense with offensive awareness beyond taking shots (he LOVES to pass), he gets dinged big. Then gets dunked on by Durant in the 2K trailer.

[King_B_Mack]

Quote: Originally Posted by The 24th Letter

I'm not saying you have an allegiance to any game,..but I don't know of you can label anyone brain dead if you can't remember you posted in a forum yesterday.

Quote: Originally Posted by Goffs

HEY HOMIE!

Priceless.

And can someone explain to me why so many people around here feel the need to bypass the language censor, just to.......wait for it. Put their own lame *** censors to their stuff?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rell7thirty]

Loving these gameplay vids. Can't wait to play! I haven't really noticed the player to court ratio some people are mentioning.

Love the fact Curry is rated 89, which is what I predicted with the new rating system. What I don't understand is, how in the world is Kobe Bryant, who missed a huge portion of last season, not to mention his long struggles with durability (ton of ankle sprains where he's missed months, torn wrist ligaments, bum right knee, ruptured achiles, fractured tibia on the other leg).. I'm not saying he hasn't bounced back, but he's 36 with a lot of miles.. A lot of injuries, two which were relatively recent and effects both his legs.. Averaged 13.8 ppg in 30mpg and honestly didn't look like Kobe. Yet, somehow, the guy is rated 89.

I'm sorry, but that page has been turned. Right now, I don't believe he's capable of playing 82 games, 46 minutes per, and dropping close to 30 points per.. Which is what Melo does, and it scares me because I know if Chris Paul is the last addition to the 90s club, Melo will be rated the same as Kobe.

Unless wisdom, and amount of championship rings, and accomplishments are a factor in your overall rating, I just don't see how Kobe Bryant could be rated 89 without proving himself.

Tldr; Kobe Bryant rated 89 is an eyebrow raiser. And wrong. IMO

Edit: not to mention, iguadola should be rated higher. All defensive first team, athletic, sick handles (crossover of the year 2014), one of the best on a fast break, good iq, can jump out of the gym, is pretty clutch when it comes down to it.

[Rondee]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sundown

I spent a season watching Barnes be terrible regardless of his minutes. Barnes was not "good" his rookie year. He was just somewhat competent for a rookie, with a decent run in playoffs because every coach literally gameplanned to allow Barnes to post up on PGs rather than let Curry shoot the ball. Somehow he regressed, and I will say much of it was due to him being run in Mark Jackson's benchmobs. However, if he was a star, he would manage to distinguish himself, especially playing against other benches. So I did: Draymond Green had 21.9 minutes per game. Barnes had 28.3 minutes per game. That is MORE than he had in 2012-13 (25.4 per game). That is more than Andre Bogut. And that is just 4 less than Iguodala, against weaker competition. Barnes shot .399% FG. That is abysmal with plenty of court time, much of it undeserved. Barnes got his minutes. He just wasn't very good. Poor basketball IQ, poor creator, poor motor, poor lateral speed (his footwork on the perimeter is terrible-- he starts out spread legged and gets no displacement on his first step), poor ball handler, inefficient midrange shooter, poor rebounder for his size. He's an average defender and not a very good scorer who's especially terrible in isolation. I think he could pick up his shooting since he has good form, but in no world is Barnes even remotely comparable to Green. Physicals are often overrated as "ceiling", but the mental aspect is just as important and sometimes more elusive. Now I'm still rooting for him, and I think his lack of role definition contributed much to his regression, as well as a possible foot injury and lost confidence-- but no sober basketball analysis can say that Barnes wasn't good only because he wasn't getting minutes, or that he's as valuable player as Green.

Okay so he got more minutes, you're right. I should've checked, but it just seemed like he never got quality minutes, they were mostly to relieve Iggy toward the end of quarters. My point is that he hasn't had the chance to develop.

Draymond is definitely the more valuable player by far, i'm not contesting that , but I'm still high on Barnes. He hasn't shown how good he can be. Draymond is good, but he is a role guy and last year is about as good as he'll be.

[ojandpizza]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rell7thirty

Loving these gameplay vids. Can't wait to play! I haven't really noticed the player to court ratio some people are mentioning. Love the fact Curry is rated 89, which is what I predicted with the new rating system. What I don't understand is, how in the world is Kobe Bryant, who missed a huge portion of last season, not to mention his long struggles with durability (ton of ankle sprains where he's missed months, torn wrist ligaments, bum right knee, ruptured achiles, fractured tibia on the other leg).. I'm not saying he hasn't bounced back, but he's 36 with a lot of miles.. A lot of injuries, two which were relatively recent and effects both his legs.. Averaged 13.8 ppg in 30mpg and honestly didn't look like Kobe. Yet, somehow, the guy is rated 89. I'm sorry, but that page has been turned. Right now, I don't believe he's capable of playing 82 games, 46 minutes per, and dropping close to 30 points per.. Which is what Melo does, and it scares me because I know if Chris Paul is the last addition to the 90s club, Melo will be rated the same as Kobe. Unless wisdom, and amount of championship rings, and accomplishments are a factor in your overall rating, I just don't see how Kobe Bryant could be rated 89 without proving himself. Tldr; Kobe Bryant rated 89 is an eyebrow raiser. And wrong. IMO

Kobe is rated an 89 because he's Kobe.. Should he be rated as high, or higher, than guys like Melo, Harden, Westbrook, Dwight, Curry, Blake, Aldridge, Paul George, etc.. Definitely not, but 2k would be pissing off a very large fan base by lowering Kobe too much.

If he can somehow regain his form from a couple years ago then he'll deserve the 89, if he's slipped which common sense would say he has, I think it would be fair to see 2k lower him some like they do other players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rondee]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rell7thirty

Loving these gameplay vids. Can't wait to play! I haven't really noticed the player to court ratio some people are mentioning. Love the fact Curry is rated 89, which is what I predicted with the new rating system. What I don't understand is, how in the world is Kobe Bryant, who missed a huge portion of last season, not to mention his long struggles with durability (ton of ankle sprains where he's missed months, torn wrist ligaments, bum right knee, ruptured achiles, fractured tibia on the other leg).. I'm not saying he hasn't bounced back, but he's 36 with a lot of miles.. A lot of injuries, two which were relatively recent and effects both his legs.. Averaged 13.8 ppg in 30mpg and honestly didn't look like Kobe. Yet, somehow, the guy is rated 89. I'm sorry, but that page has been turned. Right now, I don't believe he's capable of playing 82 games, 46 minutes per, and dropping close to 30 points per.. Which is what Melo does, and it scares me because I know if Chris Paul is the last addition to the 90s club, Melo will be rated the same as Kobe. Unless wisdom, and amount of championship rings, and accomplishments are a factor in your overall rating, I just don't see how Kobe Bryant could be rated 89 without proving himself. Tldr; Kobe Bryant rated 89 is an eyebrow raiser. And wrong. IMO Edit: not to mention, iguadola should be rated higher. All defensive first team, athletic, sick handles (crossover of the year 2014), one of the best on a fast break, good iq, can jump out of the gym, is pretty clutch when it comes down to it.

I haven't noticed the court issue either. 2k has always seemed fine with this.

[Blackhail92]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rell7thirty

I'm sorry, but that page has been turned. Right now, I don't believe he's capable of playing 82 games, 46 minutes per, and dropping close to 30 points per.. Which is what Melo does, and it scares me because I know if Chris Paul is the last addition to the 90s club, Melo will be rated the same as Kobe. Unless wisdom, and amount of championship rings, and accomplishments are a factor in your overall rating, I just don't see how Kobe Bryant could be rated 89 without proving himself. Tldr; Kobe Bryant rated 89 is an eyebrow raiser. And wrong. IMO

I have a strange feeling melo will be a 90 or 91, not like anyone else on the Knicks should be good(besides maybe JR and maybe amare) I can't remember he last time melo was under a 90 out of a box 2k roster. Career year in rebounds should help his case but Kobe being an 89 is a stretch. Rose will prob be in the 86-87 range. Interested on what harden, cp3 and Blake will be