Eric Bledsoe

[Walt Frazier]

Current Rating: 84 (has some solid athletic attributes that maybe got him a little high a little fast)

Eric has a lot of very clear, very big jumps in his stats since last year. Only playing an additional 39 seconds per game compared to last year.

First, let's look at shooting percentages which are not tied to playing time.

FG% was 44.7% last year, up significantly to 46.3% this year. Made even more significant when we note he is taking 16.9 shots this year compared to only 12.9 shots per game last year.

3PT% was 32.4% last year, up HUGE to 38.0% this year. Also an even bigger deal because he's taking 4.5 shots this year compared to 3.4 shots per game last year.

FT% is steady at 79.1%, was 80% last year. He is getting to the line a little bit more (5.9/game compared to 5.4) but that's basically just a steady continuation of his game developing.

Moving on to counting stats...

As expected with him taking more shots and more 3's per game and making a lot more of them, he's broken the 20pt barrier, now averaging 22 ppg up from 17 last year.

Assists are up to 6.6 per game, up from 6.1 last year and 5.5 the year before.

Steals are up to 2.1 per game this year from 1.6 per game the previous two seasons.

Blocks up very slightly to .7 from .6 last year and .3 the year before.

Rebounds are down to 4.3 but that is still pretty solid for a 6'1" Guard.

PER is up to 22.3 (was in the 18-19 range last two years). TS% at 56.4, OWS at 2.2, DWS at 1.0, WS/48 at .159 (highest of his career), OBPM 3.9 (by far a huge career upgrade), DBPM at .4, BPM at 4.3 (career high, was at 2.6-2.9 in the last three seasons).

So, I don't think there's much doubt that he's made another step up in his game, at the same time as he has taken on a significantly larger role in the offense.

My suggested rating is an 88, due to the huge improvements in fg%, 3pt%, steals, assists, points, WS/48, BPM, PER, even a bit on blocks, where .7/game is very nice for a guard, and very solid rebound numbers for a guard.

He's playing great, not at a total top-5 player in the game, 90+ rating level, but an incredibly talented and elite young player who may yet take another step through steady development and consistency of what he's doing now.

[James Kay]

87

[Brian Scalabrine]

87 always loved miniLBJ

[Kevin Hollis]

85

[Jeremiah Hill]

86

[Bryan Colangelo]

88

[Alex English]

86

[Deleted]

86

[Shane Battier]

86

[Walt Frazier]

Dec 21, 2015 11:33:19 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

85

Curious - 22p, 6.6a, 4+r, 2.1s, .7b, 46/38/80, on a good team in the West. Elite Athleticism that needs to be included in the ratings too, plus ideally a high stamina.

What can he do to get into the upper 80's, in your opinion?

To be clear, I'm literally wondering what the criteria for you would be. 85 feels low, I'm sure yo have a reason, I just can't see it on my own.

Gracias

[Kevin Hollis]

Dec 22, 2015 13:42:24 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Dec 21, 2015 11:33:19 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

85

Curious - 22p, 6.6a, 4+r, 2.1s, .7b, 46/38/80, on a good team in the West. Elite Athleticism that needs to be included in the ratings too, plus ideally a high stamina.

What can he do to get into the upper 80's, in your opinion?

To be clear, I'm literally wondering what the criteria for you would be. 85 feels low, I'm sure yo have a reason, I just can't see it on my own.

Gracias

I like to see people do it for a bit longer is all. We are so fast to raise the ratings of players when they do good, but everyone is always hesitant to lower ratings, e.g. Paul George. People are rating George above others such as Harden, Paul, Kwahi, Cousins, Davis etc. I really don't think George is a top 5 player in the league and that is how he is going to be rated. This is just my opinion though, others are free to disagree. I don't know how many times I have seen the comment "wait until the all-star break to lower his rating." I think there needs to be a formality in this as one contradicts the other. I always vote conservatively for this matter.

[Deleted]

Yeah stop raising ratings based on 2 months but refusing to lower them for YEARS.

It is leading to massive rating inflation.

[James Kay]

Dec 22, 2015 21:38:10 GMT @riogho said:

Yeah stop raising ratings based on 2 months but refusing to lower them for YEARS.

It is leading to massive rating inflation.

I could be wrong but I believe Ian addressed this when he crunched the numbers and it showed that the average rating was actually lower than it had been in the past.

[Deleted]

Dec 22, 2015 21:56:38 GMT James Kay said:

Dec 22, 2015 21:38:10 GMT @riogho said:

Yeah stop raising ratings based on 2 months but refusing to lower them for YEARS.

It is leading to massive rating inflation.

I could be wrong but I believe Ian addressed this when he crunched the numbers and it showed that the average rating was actually lower than it had been in the past.

Average doesn't mean anything we are putting slews of players into the upper 80s and 90s and not taking anyone out of them except Dwight Howard.

[James Kay]

Dec 22, 2015 21:57:39 GMT @riogho said:

Dec 22, 2015 21:56:38 GMT James Kay said:

I could be wrong but I believe Ian addressed this when he crunched the numbers and it showed that the average rating was actually lower than it had been in the past.

Average doesn't mean anything we are putting slews of players into the upper 80s and 90s and not taking anyone out of them except Dwight Howard.

Genuine question - what DOES average mean then?

Are you implying that we have more lower level players to balance it out? If anything I think we’ve actually cleaned up a lot of those barely rosterable players that stuck around years after being out of the league.

[Deleted]

Because it's not about average rating of 300 players because 300 players don't play.

I bet the average of STARTERS has been increasing, at least it has since I've joined, I'm out the next few days but we have to have more 85+ players now than we did last year maybe almost double.

[James Kay]

Dec 22, 2015 22:05:15 GMT @riogho said:

Because it's not about average rating of 300 players because 300 players don't play.

I bet the average of STARTERS has been increasing, at least it has since I've joined, I'm out the next few days but we have to have more 85+ players now than we did last year maybe almost double.

I don’t know the answer, but I just don’t feel that way. I’d definitely be interested in maintaining relatively a similar amount of 85+s though. It shouldn’t be hard to determine, though. Ian has all the roster pages archived, so a few minutes with Excel could give us an answer.

To play devils advocate though, are we trying to maintain a bell curve here? Does the NBA skill level reflect a proper bell curve? What if the number of “85+s” is actually increasing in the NBA?

[Deleted]

Instead of 85 say 80 and I'm pretty sure it's true

[Deleted]

Yeah maybe the amount of them is increasing.

either way average rating is just a symptom of the problem.

The problem is increasing people's ratings by a lot based on 2 months but not decreasing players until they have years of bad play.

[James Kay]

Dec 22, 2015 22:15:58 GMT @riogho said:

either way average rating is just a symptom of the problem.

Agreed. But for the most part, I don’t think that “problem” is really too severe or detrimental to the league. Nothing requiring drastic action, in my opinion. Besides, such is the nature of this kind of sim league. People have emotional attachments to their star players and wanna give them the benefit of the doubt, which is kinda fair.

Plus – I sorta subscribe to the idea that players more frequently play worse because of his situation/chemistry/team fit/injury rather than better because of those things. For example use like Afflalo and Lawson. Afflalo is playing really solid this year, as he has in the past, despite playing poorly in DEN because of that terrible situation. Lawson is playing like garbage, but I think the most of it is due to the terrible team fit and maybe some personal issues. Their ratings should reflect their current level of play, but also should take into account the context of their performance – and to connect back to my original point, I think that downgrade’s such as Lawson’s are more commonly attributed to team fit than upgrades due to team fit – meaning that when a player is playing better (for a fairly sustained period) it’s because he has improved, whereas when a player is playing worse, we should take a closer look at context.


that kinda rambled on and really took a long tangent though ahahh

[Deleted]

Dec 22, 2015 22:24:07 GMT James Kay said:

Dec 22, 2015 22:15:58 GMT @riogho said:

either way average rating is just a symptom of the problem.

Agreed. But for the most part, I don’t think that “problem” is really too severe or detrimental to the league. Nothing requiring drastic action, in my opinion. Besides, such is the nature of this kind of sim league. People have emotional attachments to their star players and wanna give them the benefit of the doubt, which is kinda fair.

Plus – I sorta subscribe to the idea that players more frequently play worse because of his situation/chemistry/team fit/injury rather than better because of those things. For example use like Afflalo and Lawson. Afflalo is playing really solid this year, as he has in the past, despite playing poorly in DEN because of that terrible situation. Lawson is playing like garbage, but I think the most of it is due to the terrible team fit and maybe some personal issues. Their ratings should reflect their current level of play, but also should take into account the context of their performance – and to connect back to my original point, I think that downgrade’s such as Lawson’s are more commonly attributed to team fit than upgrades due to team fit – meaning that when a player is playing better (for a fairly sustained period) it’s because he has improved, whereas when a player is playing worse, we should take a closer look at context.


that kinda rambled on and really took a long tangent though ahahh

It straight up ruined the playoffs last year by having Dwight rated about 10 points too high.