Wendell Carter Jr

[Amare Stoudemire]

Current:76
Suggested: 80.5

WCJ is starting to put it together and is having a career year!

MPG 29.0
PPG 12.9 Career High
BPG 0.7
SPG 0.7
APG 2.5 - Career High
RPG 10.1 - Career High
FG% 49
3P% 34 - Career High 3.8 attempts
FT% 73

*PER 36*
PPG 16.0
BPG 0.8
SPG 0.9
APG 3.1
RPG 12.6

[Jared Montini]

79

[Brian Scalabrine]

80

[Steve Nash]

79

[Tom Izzo]

79

[Walt Frazier]

I've said this before in other threads (or said similar things), just seems like a decent time to swing back to it again.

Career-high, without more context, is either misleading OR somewhat irrelevant, to me. There are multiple possible reasons for that. There's a chance the previous rating was wrong / based on too-little information / had too many or too little points on it due to a previous OVR rating being not quite right. Sometimes when that 3rd thing happens, I may either steal points or add points to an area I really don't want to. But with the OVR being locked by y'all's votes, my hands are sometimes tied. Or, maybe it's only a career-high by an almost-insignificant amount. There's also a chance that while the category being mentioned as "career-high" is true, you may not be pointing out a "career-low" somewhere else because you're of course trying to get a rating increase. I wouldn't expect someone to point out their player's career-low, but, I think it's probably better to let the full stat-picture speak for itself.

OR, at least, tell us by how much things have increased.

To dive in more detail, which may not be needed, but is my way of doing things sometimes... What if his current pass rating is 35 (due to a previous error, OR, maybe a per/36 that had it around there, OR, maybe he was rated too highly before and points had to be put somewhere that wouldn't affect his in-play game tooooo much). Now, his "career-high" 2.5 apg may mean he should actually have a 33 pass rating. (This is ALL hypothetical btw, but is possible). So, it's an example of a way that the "career-high" wording on it's own can be sort of irrelevant.

I like to see the stats, tell me he's an athletic freak or something if the stats don't show us some of the things that our ratings encompass (strength / speed / quick / etc), and let's try to be objective as much as we can.

EDIT: BTW, saying someone is maybe "8th in the league in Rebounding" means a lot lot lot more than career-high. And, on the other side, the fact his 3pt attempts are going up is good info, too.

Anyway, all this said, I'll go 79.

[Hanamichi Sakuragi]

Jan 2, 2022 3:27:04 GMT Walt Frazier said:

I've said this before in other threads (or said similar things), just seems like a decent time to swing back to it again.

Career-high, without more context, is either misleading OR somewhat irrelevant, to me. There are multiple possible reasons for that. There's a chance the previous rating was wrong / based on too-little information / had too many or too little points on it due to a previous OVR rating being not quite right. Sometimes when that 3rd thing happens, I may either steal points or add points to an area I really don't want to. But with the OVR being locked by y'all's votes, my hands are sometimes tied. Or, maybe it's only a career-high by an almost-insignificant amount. There's also a chance that while the category being mentioned as "career-high" is true, you may not be pointing out a "career-low" somewhere else because you're of course trying to get a rating increase. I wouldn't expect someone to point out their player's career-low, but, I think it's probably better to let the full stat-picture speak for itself.

OR, at least, tell us by how much things have increased.

To dive in more detail, which may not be needed, but is my way of doing things sometimes... What if his current pass rating is 35 (due to a previous error, OR, maybe a per/36 that had it around there, OR, maybe he was rated too highly before and points had to be put somewhere that wouldn't affect his in-play game tooooo much). Now, his "career-high" 2.5 apg may mean he should actually have a 33 pass rating. (This is ALL hypothetical btw, but is possible). So, it's an example of a way that the "career-high" wording on it's own can be sort of irrelevant.

I like to see the stats, tell me he's an athletic freak or something if the stats don't show us some of the things that our ratings encompass (strength / speed / quick / etc), and let's try to be objective as much as we can.

EDIT: BTW, saying someone is maybe "8th in the league in Rebounding" means a lot lot lot more than career-high. And, on the other side, the fact his 3pt attempts are going up is good info, too.

Anyway, all this said, I'll go 79.

Unfortunately, only a few of us here care about what you are talking about. 

Nonetheless, keep preaching it Walt. 

[Chauncey Billups]

80

[Arvydas Sabonis]

79.5

[Kareem Abdul-Jabbar]

80

[Walt Frazier]

THREAD CLOSED

New Rating: 80 (79.50)