NBA 2K13 News Post

NBA 2K13 Ratings: Austin Rivers - 67, Amare Stoudemire - 84, Chris Paul - 94

09:03 PM - September 5, 2012 by SouthBeach

2K Sports has revealed NBA 2K13 player ratings for 3 more players.

Austin Rivers - 67
Chris Paul - 94
Amare Stoudemire - 84

Previously revealed NBA 2K13 player ratings below.

Andrew Bynum - 87
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist - 78
Tyreke Evans - 81
Michael Jordan - 99
Derrick Rose - 92
Allen Iverson - 95 (00-01 NBA Finals Iverson)
Jared Dudley - 75
Thomas Robinson - 75
Scottie Pippen - 92
Kevin Love - 89
Anthony Davis - 80
Monta Ellis - 86
Dion Waiters - 71
Andre Iguodala - 87
Kobe Bryant - 93
Carmelo Anthony - 92
Rajon Rondo - 90
Kevin Durant - 94 (Dropped 1 point)
Blake Griffin - 86 (Dropped 1 point)
Harrison Barnes - 75

Game: NBA 2K13Reader Score: 8.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PC / PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 75 - View All

NBA 2K13 Videos

Member Comments

# 81 Mac33 @ 09/06/12 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KB2009Champ


	No offense but this thread was created to discuss their ratings. We are all feigning for the game and who does it hurt for a ratings debate/discussion to occur in a thread about ratings? Don't click the link next time if these discussions get on your nerves. Really simple solution IMO.

No offense but what was unwarranted about his reply? He can't voice his opinion like everyone else? He also makes a valid point. Moreover he never said people couldn't discuss ratings or that it got on his nerves. Its a big enough community for all of us. Just saying.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

# 82 ye24 @ 09/06/12 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madman773


	I just hope they dont overrate kobe at the begging of the season cause he should be a 89 or somwhere in that area.avging 30ppg and shotting 43% from the field for a 6'7 sg is not good at all.

First off they already showed Kobe's rating and it's higher than 89.

And how do you feel about Deron Williams being 90+? He put up 21ppg on 40% last year...so he should be like a 81 right?

# 83 MrBigShot1 @ 09/06/12 03:28 PM

How is averaging 30ppg, which he didn't do anyway not good? I don't think CP3 should be a 94 though. Pre-injury Cp3, 07-08, sure. Current cp3? I think its 3 or 4 points too high. Amare/Austin Rivers are fine imo.

# 84 Colts18 @ 09/06/12 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tuck243


	You are fooling my friend... 67 for a player that is a great scorer is not acceptable especially since Dion Waiters was a 71... Seem too low to me...

I know what he is vs. NCAA competition. Vs NBA competition he has done nothing. No such thing as underrated. Let him prove his worth.

You are the one fooling here.

# 85 Colts18 @ 09/06/12 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by speedy9386


	Just because they haven't played yet doesn't mean they don't have skill.

Until they prove that the skill exists vs. the new level of competition the skill doesn't exist.

# 86 beast10 @ 09/06/12 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colts18


	Until they prove that the skill exists vs. the new level of competition the skill doesn't exist.

Okay, so your saying if (Ex.) LeBron James was coming into the league you would give him a 67 because he is unproven ?
JS .. But anyways it's going to take a while for Rivers to get use to the NBA level and he's basically going to have to change his entire game if the Hornets really want to play him at point .
I also think he is going to battle with some injuries, he drives to the hoop WAY to aggressive .

# 87 b2tha2ndpwr @ 09/06/12 05:11 PM

I think Austin River's flashy style of play and potential for large scoring outputs make people want his rating to be higher than it should. 67's about right for a rookie. I'm sure his "potential" rating's in the 80's. I went to two Duke games last year and he looked lost from a team defense standpoint and when he didn't have the ball in his hands on offense so his awareness rating's probably rather low.

Besides, if he outperforms that rating that's what roster updates are for

Is Dion Waiters really a 71? If so that's definitely too high

# 88 Colts18 @ 09/06/12 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beast10


	Okay, so your saying if (Ex.) LeBron James was coming into the league you would give him a 67 because he is unproven ? JS .. But anyways it's going to take a while for Rivers to get use to the NBA level and he's basically going to have to change his entire game if the Hornets really want to play him at point . I also think he is going to battle with some injuries, he drives to the hoop WAY to aggressive .

No I am saying that if LeBron was coming into the league and 2K rated him a 67 I wouldn't trip because he has yet to play an NBA minute for me to have supporting evidence that his skillset/level of play would carry over to the NBA Stage.

I am simply saying that people need to prove themselves before earning skills, labels, titles. I really don't see the harm in taking the conservative approach.

# 89 squeakybirnbaum @ 09/06/12 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YoungBuck3


	When will people learn? overall rating doesn't mean ****. As long as they play true to their real life counterparts, what difference does that little "overall" rating matter, it's all of the other, specific, ratings that matter. Last year Dirk was what like 85 or something? so many people I know were raging about it "wah wah wah Dirk an 85, put a championship on his back", but his overall didn't mean jack, Dirk was beast on the game if you played him like Dirk, his stats were great for making Dirk like Dirk, that's all that matters. They should just do away with the overall rating, it doesn't mean a damn thing beyond giving people something to complain about "if this guy is an 84 my guy better be an 87" blah blah blah lol. I don't care whether a guys overall says he is 75, 85, 9001, as long as the other numbers equal a realistic representation of the player. When you're actually playing a game, what relevance does that overall number have to you? none? it's the other stats that matter. People in here talking about how Bosh needs to be better than Amare, Bosh is a better player than Amare in my opinion, but I don't give a damn who has a higher overall rating, what I care about is that Bosh plays like Bosh and Amare plays like Amare.

I could see arguing about ratings if they showed the individual ratings for everything that made up the overall rating. Then you could say say and so's mid-range is too high or so and so's steal rating is too low. But saying someone is 1 or 2 points too high overall when that is the only number that you know makes no sense.

# 90 Wildcats302 @ 09/06/12 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamnYanks2


	Not even close, MKG is a much better pick then Rivers right now. Look, we don't know how either one is gonna pan out in the league, but I would build a team around MKG, his unselfishness, work ethic, defense, and athleticism makes him a easy pick over Rivers. Rivers is definitely a SG, he has a better jumper then MKG, that's all I would give him, there is a reason Kidd-Gilchrist went Number 2 you know.

Yeah that other guy has no idea what he is talking about. And I guess all the NBA scouts and GMs are bias as well, all are closet UK fans lmao.

If the Hornets could trade Rivers today for MKG straight up they'd do it so quickly it would be hilarious to behold, but guess what? The Bobcats WOULD never make that trade, not even Jordan is that stupid as an owner.

# 91 b2tha2ndpwr @ 09/06/12 05:29 PM

I think sports games should drop the "overall" rating all together. It's never made any sense to me how they come up with who's the "better overall player" if their styles were totally different. Is Jamal Crawford a better player than Tony Allen because he has a higher overall? Or is Jamal Crawford's skillset more overall rating friendly? They're both shooting guards but totally different players.

# 92 b2tha2ndpwr @ 09/06/12 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DukeC


	I think they'd do that to be honest. They need a 2 guard. They couldn't score last year.

No they wouldn't. If they wanted Rivers over MKG, they would have drafted Rivers over MKG... They turned down the trade with Cleveland because they were worried that Washington would take MKG at 3 and wouldn't risk losing him.

# 93 Eman5805 @ 09/06/12 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac33


	No offense but what was unwarranted about his reply? He can't voice his opinion like everyone else? He also makes a valid point. Moreover he never said people couldn't discuss ratings or that it got on his nerves. Its a big enough community for all of us. Just saying. Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

All offense intended. His opinion was that the guy should probably not read the threads with subject matter he doesn't really like. Exceptionally saying.

# 94 Bajney @ 09/06/12 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by b2tha2ndpwr


	I think Austin River's flashy style of play and potential for large scoring outputs make people want his rating to be higher than it should. 67's about right for a rookie. I'm sure his "potential" rating's in the 80's. I went to two Duke games last year and he looked lost from a team defense standpoint and when he didn't have the ball in his hands on offense so his awareness rating's probably rather low. Besides, if he outperforms that rating that's what roster updates are for

Agreed. Rivers is flashy but other aspects of his game need serious work. Great handles and quickness and can get to the rim because of it...other than that though he is mediocre. I always get a chuckle at those that say he is "a great shooter" or "can shoot the three ball well". Since when is a kid that shot 32% from 3 and 70% at the ft line in high school and 36.5% from 3 and 66% from the ft line in college, considered a "great shooter"?

He is a volume scorer and a virtual black hole when the ball is in his hands. A SG in every sense of the word because he clearly doesn't have the leadership, floor vision, passing, and shot selection to be a PG. 2.2 APG at Winter Park and 2.1 APG at Duke is horrid and right now a 67 overall at PG is definitely not underrated. As others have said, move him to SG and his rating will improve.

The moron that said he is a better prospect than MKG needs to actually watch some basketball games and not YouTube highlights, then maybe we don't get the absurd, "ZOMG!!1 Rivers is clearly the better player and NBA prospect than Kidd-Gilchrist!!!"
NBA scouts and GMs clearly valued MKG more and I doubt they all are 'biased Kentucky fans looking through their blue-tinted glasses'

At 6'7.5 and 235 pounds, MKG is prototypical size for a 3 in the NBA. Unlike Rivers where his natural position is SG and standing at 6'3 200lbs. He can't rebound nor defend which explains why his overall rating is considerably lower than MKG's who is one of, if not the most, versatile players in this years class of rookies.

# 95 bm011 @ 09/06/12 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bajney


	Agreed. Rivers is flashy but other aspects of his game need serious work. Great handles and quickness and can get to the rim because of it...other than that though he is mediocre. I always get a chuckle at those that say he is "a great shooter" or "can shoot the three ball well". Since when is a kid that shot 32% from 3 and 70% at the ft line in high school and 36.5% from 3 and 66% from the ft line in college, considered a "great shooter"? He is a volume scorer and a virtual black hole when the ball is in his hands. A SG in every sense of the word because he clearly doesn't have the leadership, floor vision, passing, and shot selection to be a PG. 2.2 APG at Winter Park and 2.1 APG at Duke is horrid and right now a 67 overall at PG is definitely not underrated. As others have said, move him to SG and his rating will improve. The moron that said he is a better prospect than MKG needs to actually watch some basketball games and not YouTube highlights, then maybe we don't get the absurd, "ZOMG!!1 Rivers is clearly the better player and NBA prospect than Kidd-Gilchrist!!!" NBA scouts and GMs clearly valued MKG more and I doubt they all are 'biased Kentucky fans looking through their blue-tinted glasses' At 6'7.5 and 235 pounds, MKG is prototypical size for a 3 in the NBA. Unlike Rivers where his natural position is SG and standing at 6'3 200lbs. He can't rebound nor defend which explains why his overall rating is considerably lower than MKG's who is one of, if not the most, versatile players in this years class of rookies.

Agreed. MKG's best aspect is his defense IMO, which Rivers clearly is not even close to being as good at.

# 96 NowAndLaterCARZ @ 09/06/12 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DukeC


	I think they'd do that to be honest. They need a 2 guard. They couldn't score last year.

they got ben gordon at sg

# 97 Norris_Cole @ 09/06/12 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bajney


	NBA scouts and GMs clearly valued MKG more and I doubt they all are 'biased Kentucky fans looking through their blue-tinted glasses'

That part is pretty ignorant, do I need to remind you other guys that scouts and gm's used to value?

How about Thabeet? Wes Johnson?

Mkg is going to be a decent player but too raw offensively , he is a 3rd or even 4th offensive option at best on a decent team. I think he will struggle pretty bad in the bobcats as he clearly needs to have an elite team and teammates around to be productive and get his offense going

# 98 Wildcats302 @ 09/06/12 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norris_Cole


	That part is pretty ignorant, do I need to remind you other guys that scouts and gm's used to value? How about Thabeet? Wes Johnson? Mkg is going to be a decent player but too raw offensively , he is a 3rd or even 4th offensive option at best on a decent team. I think he will struggle pretty bad in the bobcats as he clearly needs to have an elite team and teammates around to be productive and get his offense going

We'll see buddy, can't wait to see you swallow your words later this season. You will be nowhere to found in a couple of years when MKG has developed his jumper...his offense is fine minus a solid jumper.

Meanwhile Rivers will flop as PG..guy is a ballhog SG, play the guy where he belongs if you want him to do anything well IMO.

# 99 Norris_Cole @ 09/06/12 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirTeezy


	Lol that made no sense.....scouts valued LeBron and Kevin Durant too. What's your point

My point is that what scouts value means nothing. They are wrong a lot of times as well

# 100 DamnYanks2 @ 09/06/12 06:50 PM

I have no bias against Duke players, Yea I hate Duke, but I still appreciate the talent that come's out of there. i would have taken Kyrie Irving over any of my beloved Kentucky players in last years draft. I knew he was gonna be great at the next level.

I just don't see Rivers do anything extraordinary, like people have said; a volume shooter, with good quickness, and can finish around the basket. He's definitely not a pg, he's a true sg, and he's really not too great at that. I think he will progress, but I don't think he will ever be great.

Kidd-Gilchrist is a monster, I watched both, and this kid is just oozing potential. I'm ready to watch him at the next level, he'll have some growing pains, especially if he doen't improve his shot release, but from the very start, I think you will see him dominate defensively, and his rebounding prowess, along with is excellent athleticism. There are just too many players like Rivers, and he has alot of work to do, and is nowhere near MKG's level.

DukeC: Why do they need a SG, when they have Gordon? Just Curious..

« Previous 1 2 3 456 7 8 9 10 Next »

More Links

NBA 2K13 Ratings: Austin Rivers - 67, Amare Stoudemire - 84, Chris Paul - 94