An In-Depth Look at the Changes to the NBA 2K16 Ratings System

[Real2KInsider]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trackball

So what does that make the 1995 Rockets? To get to the Finals, they had to beat the three teams with the three best records in the league: Jazz had 60 wins, Suns had 59, Spurs had 62. Then they swept the Magic, who had 57. The Rockets were seeded sixth. Lowest-seeded champion in league history. Yet even to this day, people say "So what? No Jordan." Uh, who did the Magic beat in the second round? ... I apologize. It's just, seeing them win it on live TV back then, two years in a row, was some of the happiest memories of my childhood. Hearing those champion Rockets teams get so disrespected today (and even AT THE TIME) just...grinds my gears, to coin a phrase.

I am not exactly sure what this is implying or taking out of context. The 95 Rockets stand as one of the greatest accomplishments in NBA history, but they do stand as a hiccup of a formative era that will never happen again (one that the Bulls likewise tie into).

While some look at the past with rose-tinted goggles I personally think the college 3pt line of the 1995-97 made the NBA a bonafide joke. I loved the NBA at this time, but I was simply too too young to understand how unbalanced it made the league. It is not a surprise that the Bulls won 72/69 games subsequently in 96 and 97 and that no team has come close.

Jordan 3PT
Short Line (95-97): 238-589 (40.4%, 1.3 per game)
Normal Line: 343-1189 (28.8%, 0.3 per game)

Nothing else needs to be said about what a monumental change it was and how meaningless it renders any accomplishments with regard to historical context. People will talk about the 72 win team forever as the greatest but the irony is this season's Warriors team (who came up in discussions, due to their coach) would have decimated the league 20 years ago under the rules back then.

People will often put the 80s/90s on a pedestal but the league was still figuring itself out from a variety of competitive balance standpoints. The 95 Rockets were good/lucky. It certainly shouldn't be lost that they won the championship in 94, but giving credence to an anomaly is counterproductive when no other 6th seed in history has ever been close to being a contender. It's like freaking out over the 99 Knicks being disrespected if we were to talk about 8th seed teams not being any good.

[Real2KInsider]

Quote: Originally Posted by stillfeelme

I was just thinking about these ratings and dunking. How do they justify who is the 99 dunker? Wilkins Jordan Vince Dr. J

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that multiple players can't have 99s in a rating, especially at something as subjective as dunking.

The only thing 2K said was that they would be expanding their scales, because elite players would often break the scale and deserve much higher than the maximum rating.

IIRC their 1996 Michael Jordan model has been around 107 Overall for a number of years, meaning you could drop his mid-range rating by 70 points before even seeing a dent in his "99 OVR". That was one of the reasons for wanting to create more separation, because it's confusing for fans to see trash James Harden only a couple points below Jordan... especially since anyone who has used Jordan in the last few years knows just how broken he is.

More over, with all the Pink Diamonds coming out that boost MyTeam legend ratings to even more absurd proportions, one needs them to be lower rated at the start for the upgrades to be perceived as something to be sought out.

[BluFu]

Quote: Originally Posted by thedream2k16

There real test to this new logic is kobe bryant. He hasn't shot a high % from the field or played much in the last 2 seasons due to injuries. With him being the OLD kobe , will he play like his NBA stats suggest? or will be be the kobe from 8 years ago? 37% from field 29% from 3

Quote: Originally Posted by Sundown

Holy nuts. 37% and sub 30 from three. I'd give Kobe a 78 just to be generous.

Not that easy. It's the Derrick Rose situation all over again. They know what he can do while healthy but hasn't been over the course of the full season for a while. Kobe & Rose will get an 80+ rating once again this year because at the top of their game, they're top 10-20 players.

[ojandpizza]

So Jordan beating Reggie Miller, who's nowhere near a top 50 player, and a bunch of role players with he and Pippen by far the best shooting guard and by far the best small forward in the league, as most any other "contender" was strictly because of a good center, was a big challenge for them?

Miami Heat squad with Mourning, Tim and not much else was a tall task?

Ewing and role players?

Shaq, Penny, and not one other double digit scorer?

Bullets with Rod Strickand as their leading scorer?

Hawks with Mookie Blaylock as a leading scorer?

Hornets with Rice and Divac?

Don't get me wrong, Bulls played some solid teams but nothing that was up to par with them. Reggie vs Jordan? Rex Chapman vs Jordan? Anderson and Scott vs Jordan/Pippen, Starks vs Jordan, Cheaney and Howard vs Jordan/Pippen, those match ups are astronomically apart.

People fail to realize just how large of an advantage Jordan/Pippen duo had. The next best SG and SF were MILES behind them. And even if they happened to face the next best in line there wasn't two of them on a same team like Chicago.

Reggie's 98 squad took them to 7, honestly shouldn't have went more than 5, but aside from that the Bulls final 3 peat match ups went 29 and 4.. And 29 win and 4 loss record against those teams isn't easy??? What do you consider easy then?

IMO those Miami squads, which outside of LeBron, Wade, Bosh weren't all that great anyways, beating Celtics big 3, Indy, LeBron beating Chicago this year, IMO those are all tougher match ups than probably anything that Bulls squad faced once they hit the 90's, other than probably the 92 Knicks.. And that's only because McDaniel was making Pippen his bitch lol.

Jordan did face some loaded teams in the 80's.. And he didn't have Pippen or Phil yet. And that's why he was losing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[2_headedmonster]

Quote: Originally Posted by BluFu

Not that easy. It's the Derrick Rose situation all over again. They know what he can do while healthy but hasn't been over the course of the full season for a while. Kobe & Rose will get an 80+ rating once again this year because at the top of their game, they're top 10-20 players.

i get that thinking and Kobe is my favorite player, but that wouldn't be true to the system they claim to have laid out.

[Rockie_Fresh88]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rashidi

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that multiple players can't have 99s in a rating, especially at something as subjective as dunking. The only thing 2K said was that they would be expanding their scales, because elite players would often break the scale and deserve much higher than the maximum rating. IIRC their 1996 Michael Jordan model has been around 107 Overall for a number of years, meaning you could drop his mid-range rating by 70 points before even seeing a dent in his "99 OVR". That was one of the reasons for wanting to create more separation, because it's confusing for fans to see trash James Harden only a couple points below Jordan... especially since anyone who has used Jordan in the last few years knows just how broken he is. More over, with all the Pink Diamonds coming out that boost MyTeam legend ratings to even more absurd proportions, one needs them to be lower rated at the start for the upgrades to be perceived as something to be sought out.

What about the boosts from badges ? And hotspots

[Trackball]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rashidi

While some look at the past with rose-tinted goggles I personally think the college 3pt line of the 1995-97 made the NBA a bonafide joke. I loved the NBA at this time, but I was simply too too young to understand how unbalanced it made the league. It is not a surprise that the Bulls won 72/69 games subsequently in 96 and 97 and that no team has come close.

So what does that make the Rockets, who won under BOTH conditions?

Also: College? College was 19'9". That shortened NBA line was 22 feet even.

Still a dumb idea in hindsight to move it, but if we're going to be disregarding that second title on a technicality like so many others have...

Would you throw away the Spurs' first title, because the season was 50 games?
Would you throw away the Heat's 2012 title, because the season was 66 games?
Would you throw away the Warriors' 2015 title because both Kyrie and Love were out?

But I've derailed this thread enough with my Rocket Red rage.

(Oh, by the way: Scoring went DOWN throughout the league when that shorter arc was used, because then players who shouldn't have been shooting threes then decided to try it.)

[stillfeelme]

Quote: Originally Posted by BluFu

Not that easy. It's the Derrick Rose situation all over again. They know what he can do while healthy but hasn't been over the course of the full season for a while. Kobe & Rose will get an 80+ rating once again this year because at the top of their game, they're top 10-20 players.

I feel like this Kobe athletically should be rated as a 37 year old player way past his prime.

His actual shooting ratings and tendencies should be heavily slanted towards his play towards the last two years. Kobe shot selection last year was so bad man it was just horrible. He took so many contested jumpers and missed so many of them.

So if I play against the Lakers I want Kobe taking bad shots with a heavy usage rate, touch tendency and he should be missing a lot of them.

Kobe took almost 10 contested jumpers a game or tightly contested of his 20 FGA. When the majority of the shots you can get off are contested jumpers it says your athleticism has faded and you can't blow by defenders anymore. The Lakers were better per possession with Kobe off the court

I have a feeling Kobe will be somewhere in the 81-83 range. His defense is not there anymore if you look up his defense stats. Players actually shot better when guarded by Kobe.