|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Feb 4, 2015 0:41:41 GMT
Current Rating: 73
Numbers - 6.6 pts 6.1 rebs 0.8 ast 0.8 stl 1.2 blk 43.9%FG 16.5 mins
January - 7.7 pts 8.0 rebs 1.0 ast 0.9 stl 1.8 blk 41.5%FG 21.9 mins
Advanced:
Per - 15.5
TS % - 47.6%
WS - 0.9
Assisted Shots - 66%
Suggestion: 75
That should be much higher if not for his poor shooting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jeremiah Hill on Feb 4, 2015 1:10:41 GMT
He's gonna be good when he is able to finish.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 27, 2024 0:33:40 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2015 1:13:47 GMT
I'd just hold off on rating him for a month or so until we know what we're getting. Right now he'd be a 74, imo. If he can clean up his misses like jeremiah said, he could be as high as a 77 right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex English on Feb 4, 2015 1:26:16 GMT
This is way too early. He's fine at a 73.
Also, in what world does Jusuf Nurkic deserve an equal or higher rating than Mason Plumlee? That's nonsense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Scalabrine on Feb 4, 2015 2:00:28 GMT
I'd rather wait a month lomger
|
|
Kevin Hollis
Former Thunder GM for 7 years
All Star
Posts: 2,838 
|
Post by Kevin Hollis on Feb 4, 2015 12:27:57 GMT
Wait longer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Feb 4, 2015 13:59:53 GMT
I like how we all need to wait longer to see an increase on a Rookie but everyone is all over the decrease for them. Double standard in action. Wait on all if them!
|
|
|
|
Post by Charles Barkley on Feb 7, 2015 6:26:02 GMT
I think this is stupid as fuck, and my vote is to keep him the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Feb 8, 2015 0:36:46 GMT
Some of his individual ratings could be touched to slightly but I think the net change would be neutral or thereabouts. Just wait longer.
|
|
Kevin Hollis
Former Thunder GM for 7 years
All Star
Posts: 2,838
|
Post by Kevin Hollis on Feb 8, 2015 16:30:42 GMT
I like how we all need to wait longer to see an increase on a Rookie but everyone is all over the decrease for them. Double standard in action. Wait on all if them! The problem is he actually sees the floor so there is something to go off of. You neglect this everytime. Why should a rookie who is a 77 stay at a 77 because we haven't seen him play? That honestly makes no sense at all. If he was that good, he would play regardless of the situation. |
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Feb 9, 2015 5:12:04 GMT
I like how we all need to wait longer to see an increase on a Rookie but everyone is all over the decrease for them. Double standard in action. Wait on all if them! The problem is he actually sees the floor so there is something to go off of. You neglect this everytime. Why should a rookie who is a 77 stay at a 77 because we haven't seen him play? That honestly makes no sense at all. If he was that good, he would play regardless of the situation. I honestly don't even know what you're talking about kevin. You seem to have a sudden vendetta out for me. It also seems you have not read my longer post in the "rookie ratings for next year" thread. Or if you did you didn't grasp that I agree, if players have played enough to prove something, we can and should update their ratings, if an update is evidently needed. I am still personally hesitant to change guys drastically b/c they are not playing. Plus, it's just my damn opinion on some of these players. Kyle Anderson is a 74 and he's perfectly fine there. He's barely playing, and that's fine, but looking at his ratings, he is good where he is. He's not even that good anywhere, he's just decent/average/ok a lot of places. Even slightly below average, but not BAD hardly anywhere either. It comes out to a 74. Meanwhile we have Kyle Korver as the best shooter of all time and he comes out as a 75. It's actually not all relative at all. There are so many things going into these ratings, the OVR is not always relevant depending on the type of player they are. Nurkic could maybe come up in some areas but down in others, and I just don't think, personally, MY OPINION, that's all it is brosef, chill the hell out, I just don't think he needs changed just yet. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 27, 2024 0:33:40 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2015 6:01:33 GMT
Actually, im an avid daily fantasy player... I watch a lot of basketball... and 77 is about right.
He is trending up though. Hes one of the rookies that magically was rated slightly correctly.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 27, 2024 0:33:40 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2015 6:04:31 GMT
And Walt, I think the kevins annoyance comes in that, well if the overall rating doesnt matter?! why are we even voting? Come on, either the overall ratings matter, and 40+ rookies are over rated, or they dont matter and only the templates matter and this entire sub forum is a waste of time, If it is as CB says, and the templates are all that matter then all of our voting to raise a player 4-5 points doesnt mean shit.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 27, 2024 0:33:40 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2015 6:07:29 GMT
AND if the overall ratings do not matter, and the templates and individual ratings are all that matter, all the more important to let everyone see the ratings for everyone,
We cant have it both ways. You cant tell kevin that 3-4 points dont matter, and yet still have an entire subforum devoted to letting people vote over 3-4 points. Either our input matters, and the rookies need re rated badly, or our input doesnt matter, and the system needs to be drastically changed.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 27, 2024 0:33:40 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2015 6:07:50 GMT
/ drunk posts (yet good points)
|
|
|
|
Post by Charles Barkley on Feb 9, 2015 8:34:17 GMT
And Walt, I think the kevins annoyance comes in that, well if the overall rating doesnt matter?! why are we even voting? Come on, either the overall ratings matter, and 40+ rookies are over rated, or they dont matter and only the templates matter and this entire sub forum is a waste of time, If it is as CB says, and the templates are all that matter then all of our voting to raise a player 4-5 points doesnt mean shit. I never said templates are all that matter. You just have to look at a player and know who he is. Derrick Rose at a 93 was a highly athletic guard who slashes to the hoop. At an 85, he'll do the exact same except be a little less good at it. That's the point with the Rookies. Stauskus can be a 70, he's still gonna be a good shooter. Nurkic is a big body with a little bit of inside moves. He could probably use a little more loving and rearranging of some of his stats, but he will be who you see on the court each and every night if he is given the opportunity in the sim. |
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Feb 9, 2015 13:46:20 GMT
First, I am not saying OVR do not matter. If it ever came out that way, I messed up. I was referring to things like Marcus Morris at a 75 and Warren at a 76. When it's that close, it can be easy to see why one with lower ratings might play over the one with higher ratings in the real life world.
Please don't take comments out of context. OVR means the sum of the individual ratings is higher or lower. But a lower ovr could be a more effective player than a higher ovr in some cases. Some cases!
Anyway, since you were drunk I guess I won't take it too seriously.
|
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Feb 9, 2015 13:49:02 GMT
Everyone's votes matter. The OVR matter. It's just not always super clear cut and dry, that's all. A lot of the time it is, but not always. Simply comparing one ovr to another ovr while ignoring things like style of player, team makeup, and strengths and weaknesses of the players you are comparing and the style of play his team wants... That is the issue I've been talking about the last couple days.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allen Iverson on Feb 9, 2015 16:11:30 GMT
He sees the floor a lot bc of the Mozgov trade. Denver has no other option at C spot with McGee out; Hickson is a PF but is forced to play McGee's spot. A reason why they're bringing former 2nd round pick Joffrey Lauvergne too.
He's fine at 73. I'm not against the increase/decrease in rookies as long as all areas Walt mentioned are considered
|
|
|
|
Post by Charles Barkley on Feb 9, 2015 22:09:25 GMT
He sees the floor a lot bc of the Mozgov trade. Denver has no other option at C spot with McGee out; Hickson is a PF but is forced to play McGee's spot. A reason why they're bringing former 2nd round pick Joffrey Lauvergne too. He's fine at 73. I'm not against the increase/decrease in rookies as long as all areas Walt mentioned are considered Personally, if you've watch Nurkic closely, like I have, the guy has amazing instincts for a rookie. He just has trouble with fouls, like every young big, and finishing when he isn't dunking. He protects the rim well too. Mozgov was an asset that the Nuggets didn't think of trading till Nurkic blossomed into what he is, a gigantic rose. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 27, 2024 0:33:40 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 2:55:58 GMT
He sees the floor a lot bc of the Mozgov trade. Denver has no other option at C spot with McGee out; Hickson is a PF but is forced to play McGee's spot. A reason why they're bringing former 2nd round pick Joffrey Lauvergne too. He's fine at 73. I'm not against the increase/decrease in rookies as long as all areas Walt mentioned are considered Personally, if you've watch Nurkic closely, like I have, the guy has amazing instincts for a rookie. He just has trouble with fouls, like every young big, and finishing when he isn't dunking. He protects the rim well too. Mozgov was an asset that the Nuggets didn't think of trading till Nurkic blossomed into what he is, a gigantic rose. QFT. Nurkic is 2nd only to Whiteside and Gobert this year in "1st yr" big man rankings. if his shots just fell a little better he'd deserve his 77. Though if Nurkic is a 77 i suggest everyone edit their ratings in the whiteside thread, because theyve played the same minites  |
|
|
|
Post by Charles Barkley on Feb 10, 2015 10:26:48 GMT
Personally, if you've watch Nurkic closely, like I have, the guy has amazing instincts for a rookie. He just has trouble with fouls, like every young big, and finishing when he isn't dunking. He protects the rim well too. Mozgov was an asset that the Nuggets didn't think of trading till Nurkic blossomed into what he is, a gigantic rose. QFT. Nurkic is 2nd only to Whiteside and Gobert this year in "1st yr" big man rankings. if his shots just fell a little better he'd deserve his 77. Though if Nurkic is a 77 i suggest everyone edit their ratings in the whiteside thread, because theyve played the same minites Those Whiteside rankings, at least mine, were from when he just signed his 10 day |
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Feb 10, 2015 14:10:34 GMT
QFT. Nurkic is 2nd only to Whiteside and Gobert this year in "1st yr" big man rankings. if his shots just fell a little better he'd deserve his 77. Though if Nurkic is a 77 i suggest everyone edit their ratings in the whiteside thread, because theyve played the same minites Those Whiteside rankings, at least mine, were from when he just signed his 10 day And that is the danger in putting up threads quickly for super small sample sizes. |
|
|
|
Post by Charles Barkley on Feb 10, 2015 14:15:29 GMT
Those Whiteside rankings, at least mine, were from when he just signed his 10 day And that is the danger in putting up threads quickly for super small sample sizes. he wasnt supposed to be added into the game like that though. he was supposed to be added in the off-season, like we discussed in the rc |
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Feb 10, 2015 14:24:03 GMT
And that is the danger in putting up threads quickly for super small sample sizes. he wasnt supposed to be added into the game like that though. he was supposed to be added in the off-season, like we discussed in the rc Yea I still think that would be the better/safer thing but Ian doesn't necessarily agree. I'm not sure it's a huge deal or not, but consistency should be the main goal. It would help with things like this though. What if after those 10 days he started to fade fast and only deserved a 69 but everyone gave him low-mid 70's? Tricky situations that require more time to see how guys perform. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 27, 2024 0:33:40 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 14:58:34 GMT
But its Hassan Whiteside, clearly the next coming of (black) Jesus.
|
|
|
|
Post by Charles Barkley on Feb 11, 2015 2:36:33 GMT
But its Hassan Whiteside, clearly the next coming of (black) Jesus. I am not trying to say anything racist or like that, but Hassan sounds like a Muslim name. Maybe he is the new prophet of Muhammed  |
|
|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Feb 27, 2015 0:13:53 GMT
bump
|
|
Cleveland Cavaliers
Denver Nuggets
New Orleans Pelicans
Minnesota Timberwolves
Philadelphia 76ers
