Serge Ibaka

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 13, 2016 18:51:05 GMT Jeremiah Hill said:

Current Rating: 85
Suggedted Rating: 80

Basically worse than Karl Towns except for 3pt shooting even though Towns plays fewer minutes. Everyone is voting Towns like an 82 that means Ibaka should be lower. 

I think there are like 3 actual votes, and 2 of those people said Towns would be at least an 84-85 if he had been doing this longer.

So, your logic is a little incomplete here.

Serge has a WAY higher 3pt % and is much more established there, which is going to boost his rating quite a few points (shooting 42.6% this year, and actually 38.1% for his career). Also has half a block advantage on Jahlil which, at that upper level, might be a full OVR point on it's own? Close to it anyway.

His rebounding probably needs touched up, but his 3pt probably needs work too.

84 I guess.

[James Kay]

Oh wow, Jeremiah. This is a new low for you. So spiteful that I raised your tanking players like a total of 4 points.

I voted KAT for an 82 halfway through his rookie year… how is this comparable ?

Besides, I’d honestly take Ibaka if I was trying to win a game tomorrow. I think he’s better than KAT is right now.

Serge takes almost double the 3PA and knocks them down at a much higher clip – 41% ! He’s undeniably a better shooter – taking a ton of 16 > 3 shots. He’s also a top 3 rim protector according to Nylon Calculus. nyloncalculus.com/stats/rim-protection/

Ranks #1 in Total Pos. Adjusted Points Saved (Gobert would probably be #1 if not for his injury)..

KAT will very very likely end up being the better player but this thread is transparently spiteful.

Serge is not a multifaceted player – he has only average inside/PnR game and average rebounding, but he provides elite spacing for his position and elite rim protection,

85 if this is an actual thread that is going to stay up. Serge hasnt done anything to warrant a decrease or an increase IMO

[Kevin Hollis]

Serge is good. 84

[Brian Scalabrine]

84

[Jeremiah Hill]

Jan 13, 2016 19:46:05 GMT James Kay said:

Oh wow, Jeremiah. This is a new low for you. So spiteful that I raised your tanking players like a total of 4 points.

I voted KAT for an 82 halfway through his rookie year… how is this comparable ?

Besides, I’d honestly take Ibaka if I was trying to win a game tomorrow. I think he’s better than KAT is right now.

Serge takes almost double the 3PA and knocks them down at a much higher clip – 41% ! He’s undeniably a better shooter – taking a ton of 16 > 3 shots. He’s also a top 3 rim protector according to Nylon Calculus. nyloncalculus.com/stats/rim-protection/

Ranks #1 in Total Pos. Adjusted Points Saved (Gobert would probably be #1 if not for his injury)..

KAT will very very likely end up being the better player but this thread is transparently spiteful.

Serge is not a multifaceted player – he has only average inside/PnR game and average rebounding, but he provides elite spacing for his position and elite rim protection,

85 if this is an actual thread that is going to stay up. Serge hasnt done anything to warrant a decrease or an increase IMO

If you think Towns stats deserve an 82 then Ibakas rating is too high.

[James Kay]

Jan 13, 2016 21:03:58 GMT Jeremiah Hill said:

Jan 13, 2016 19:46:05 GMT James Kay said:

Oh wow, Jeremiah. This is a new low for you. So spiteful that I raised your tanking players like a total of 4 points.

I voted KAT for an 82 halfway through his rookie year… how is this comparable ?

Besides, I’d honestly take Ibaka if I was trying to win a game tomorrow. I think he’s better than KAT is right now.

Serge takes almost double the 3PA and knocks them down at a much higher clip – 41% ! He’s undeniably a better shooter – taking a ton of 16 > 3 shots. He’s also a top 3 rim protector according to Nylon Calculus. nyloncalculus.com/stats/rim-protection/

Ranks #1 in Total Pos. Adjusted Points Saved (Gobert would probably be #1 if not for his injury)..

KAT will very very likely end up being the better player but this thread is transparently spiteful.

Serge is not a multifaceted player – he has only average inside/PnR game and average rebounding, but he provides elite spacing for his position and elite rim protection,

85 if this is an actual thread that is going to stay up. Serge hasnt done anything to warrant a decrease or an increase IMO

If you think Towns stats deserve an 82 then Ibakas rating is too high.

How? You failed to address a single point I made. You believe KAT is currently playing at a level 2 points higher than Serge?

He’s simply one of the top rim protectors in the entire league…

You failed to address a single point I made. How can you justify a 5 point drop in rating? Because youre cranky your rookie only got an 82? I voted in line with our traditional approach of gradually introducing players – especially rookies!

Please, explain how Serge has decreased in abilities in 5 overall points.

This is a top 2 rim protector in the league that shoots 40% from three. Get real.

[Jeremiah Hill]

I'm cranky that you and Adam seem to really jump at the opportunity to raise my players up when you know that we are competeing for ping pong balls. Delly wasn't even created for a few weeks and hes got a stock watch thread about him. Casspi too.

I don't see how Karl Towns is up for an increase this early. And into the same ratings area as players like Ibaka had to play several seasons to get the respect to just get up into the 80's. What happened to our new patient approach.

[James Kay]

Jan 13, 2016 21:49:38 GMT Jeremiah Hill said:

I'm cranky that you and Adam seem to really jump at the opportunity to raise my players up when you know that we are competeing for ping pong balls. Delly wasn't even created for a few weeks and hes got a stock watch thread about him. Casspi too.

I don't see how Karl Towns is up for an increase this early. And into the same ratings area as players like Ibaka had to play several seasons to get the respect to just get up into the 80's. What happened to our new patient approach.

I wasn't aware when Delly and Casspi were created.

I voted to increase them by maybe 2 points as a tongue in cheek retort to your KG thing - I didn't expect you to get this upset about me RAISING your players. Besides, I don't think my votes were unfair. Both have been playing really well this season. I'm not "jumping" at any chance to raise your players.

I also didn't create the page for KAT, I simply have been noticing his stellar play and put in a vote. I have no problem with waiting.

But I do have a problem with someone creating a 5 point decrease thread for a player that has not gotten any worse, and based that decrease by comparing him to one player - that player being on your team. AND the motivation because I raised your players like 2 points, deservedly. If anything Serge has gotten better. His range is at an all time high and while his blocks have decreased his effectiveness as a rim protector has gone up.

This thread is personal in that you evaluate Serge strictly in relation to your player(KAT) AND you picked Serge just because I voted for Dellvedova to be increased 2 goddamn points. Frankly, I don't feel good about this blatant bias coming from someone who has so much input on rating construction.

[Deleted]

Kristaps had a thread and KAT is way better, stop being so fucking petty Jeremiah. You did it in my trade thread too.

[Jeremiah Hill]

I did it in your trade because the trade was stupid.

I don't actually think that Ibaka is worse than Towns. I was just making a point about how we might not be taking player roles into consideration enough. Ibaka is the 3rd option on a team whos now maybe the 4th option with Kanter in the picture. If he was on a team where he was the 2nd option his stats would be better than Towns. And with players like Pek coming back from injury Towns stats will go down leaving him overrated.

I'm not going to tally these ibaka ratings so if someone actually believes hes overrated (he's not) then they can start another.

Thread closed.

[Sam Bowie]

James, I hope you learned your lesson *****.

[Deleted]

Jan 14, 2016 5:31:10 GMT Jeremiah Hill said:

Thread closed.

This is like when people tag me to vote on their trades! 

[Kevin Hollis]

I don't think you can close a thread like this.. People were literally rating to lower Ibaka.

[Sam Bowie]

Dude, what part of "Thread closed" you don't understand.

[Kevin Hollis]

"Dude", shut the fuck up.

[Sam Bowie]

why so serious?

[Charles Barkley]

I feel like everyone needs to cut the shit on the spitefulness about ratings.

This is the problem with the stock watch. I can go through all the contending teams in the West and put up whoever I want for a decrease. Will it always work to decrease their players? Yeah, pretty much.

And here is why:

Every player's rating can be twisted and turned to a point where people would agree they are rated too high by looking at some form of statistics. We can go around and say Dirk is having an off year and is declining. When, in reality, he is having the same year as last year, possibly a little better. However, I can relate that back to his rating and declare a player scoring 18 a game with 6.5 boards and 48 from the fied and 39 from 3 isn't worthy of Dirk's rating, whatever it is. No matter his rating, I could argue it down and make it persuasive enough to get 4-5 votes on him to lower it because people listen and are easily persuaded, its just human nature.

And off the Dirk argument, I can make an argument against Love, and from Love to another player and another.



We can't cross compare players. You shouldn't be comparing Ibaka to KAT. They are two different players. One has been in the league a lot long than the other and has been doing whatever it is he does, longer. That's just the facts.

Instead of everyone of us cross comparing players, we need to have a formulated opinion in our own heads about what represents an 85 for a PF in this case. We can't be cross comparing players, because when we do that, we are bringing everyone in to the argument, when it is really about one player, and one player only.

Voters, have an opinion about what a player is. Stop being easily persuaded by stats that just represent one side of the argument. Do your own research and figure out what a rating should be for a player in your own opinion. 

A democracy fails when the voter is uneducated. Do your due diligence on a player before voting. This is a responsibility and a privilege of a voter. If people continue to not understand this, it wouldn't be a surprise to see Ian and the Secret Council of Elders just do the voting themselves and control it all.

On Ibaka: I feel don't feel like he is worth the 85 we gave him. I feel like he is still an 85 but he needs touched up to be accurate with what he is now. He is having a good year in some areas and a down year in others, and his attributes need to be changed to be accurate and up to date. 

85 but touched up to decrease his rebounding, increase his 3PT shooting and the %of 3PT shots he takes as well as his range. He has also lost some athletic ability this year, as he is just getting older. Not a lot, but decrased a little to increase his 3PT ratings. 

[Charles Barkley]

Jan 13, 2016 23:00:34 GMT Andrei Kirilenko said:

Agree with Jeremiah. We are REALLY overrating rookies if you think Kristaps or KAT are anywhere close to 80

Agree with J and Josh.

These rookies aren't any better than the rookies from the previous year. Kristapas is getting rating bias because he plays in a big market in New York. He isn't an 80. Calm down. 

No rookie deserves a rating above an 82-83. And those ratings should be reserved for the guys like Wiggins who have crazy attributes that just need to be high. 

What is insane about Kristpas game? He doesn't do anything on an All-Star caliber level. Neither does KAT, or Jahill. And to that matter, neither does Jabari. 

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 14, 2016 22:29:05 GMT Charles Barkley said:

I feel like everyone needs to cut the shit on the spitefulness about ratings.

You shouldn't be comparing Ibaka to KAT. They are two different players. One has been in the league a lot long than the other and has been doing whatever it is he does, longer. That's just the facts.

We can't be cross comparing players, because when we do that, we are bringing everyone in to the argument, when it is really about one player, and one player only.

Charles, I liked your post. These are the best points from it, in case anyone gets intimidated by the size of the post. Plus you repeated a couple of points and rambled slightly, which I do all of the time, so just cutting through to the really good stuff.

:-)

[Hanamichi Sakuragi]

Jan 14, 2016 22:33:15 GMT Charles Barkley said:

Jan 13, 2016 23:00:34 GMT Andrei Kirilenko said:

Agree with Jeremiah. We are REALLY overrating rookies if you think Kristaps or KAT are anywhere close to 80

Agree with J and Josh.

These rookies aren't any better than the rookies from the previous year. Kristapas is getting rating bias because he plays in a big market in New York. He isn't an 80. Calm down. 

No rookie deserves a rating above an 82-83. And those ratings should be reserved for the guys like Wiggins who have crazy attributes that just need to be high. 

What is insane about Kristpas game? He doesn't do anything on an All-Star caliber level. Neither does KAT, or Jahill. And to that matter, neither does Jabari. 

There is nothing insane about his skills right now. But basically, he is a long dude who can shoot threes, an above average rebounder, a good defender, a passable passer, with some post moves and a jumper.

I am pretty sure, a player doesn't need an insane skill to reach 80 because if you can do a lot of goo things, you will need to put a lot of skill points on a lot of skills and that will mean increasing the overall rating. 

There is no problem about being conservative with the rookies, but you also need to open your eyes on the current skills set of the newcomers. Don't be conservative just for the sake of conservatism. 

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 15, 2016 5:37:01 GMT Hanamichi Sakuragi said:

Jan 14, 2016 22:33:15 GMT Charles Barkley said:

Agree with J and Josh.

These rookies aren't any better than the rookies from the previous year. Kristapas is getting rating bias because he plays in a big market in New York. He isn't an 80. Calm down. 

No rookie deserves a rating above an 82-83. And those ratings should be reserved for the guys like Wiggins who have crazy attributes that just need to be high. 

What is insane about Kristpas game? He doesn't do anything on an All-Star caliber level. Neither does KAT, or Jahill. And to that matter, neither does Jabari. 

There is nothing insane about his skills right now. But basically, he is a long dude who can shoot threes, an above average rebounder, a good defender, a passable passer, with some post moves and a jumper.

I am pretty sure, a player doesn't need an insane skill to reach 80 because if you can do a lot of goo things, you will need to put a lot of skill points on a lot of skills and that will mean increasing the overall rating. 

There is no problem about being conservative with the rookies, but you also need to open your eyes on the current skills set of the newcomers. Don't be conservative just for the sake of conservatism. 

Well said!

No two players are created equally. If someone has a well-rounded skill set especially the big men who can shoot threes and rebound and are somewhat athletic, the rating is going to be higher even if they're not"as good" or don't make"as big of" an impact compared to some other players with those ratings.

[Walt Frazier]

This is also the reason why I always give some of the highest ratings to guys like nic Batum and draymond Green. They just do a lot of things very well. Even if they aren't elite at anything ( although those two guys are in some areas), you have to give respect and points to their overall skill set.

[Charles Barkley]

Jan 15, 2016 5:37:01 GMT Hanamichi Sakuragi said:

Jan 14, 2016 22:33:15 GMT Charles Barkley said:

Agree with J and Josh.

These rookies aren't any better than the rookies from the previous year. Kristapas is getting rating bias because he plays in a big market in New York. He isn't an 80. Calm down. 

No rookie deserves a rating above an 82-83. And those ratings should be reserved for the guys like Wiggins who have crazy attributes that just need to be high. 

What is insane about Kristpas game? He doesn't do anything on an All-Star caliber level. Neither does KAT, or Jahill. And to that matter, neither does Jabari. 

There is nothing insane about his skills right now. But basically, he is a long dude who can shoot threes, an above average rebounder, a good defender, a passable passer, with some post moves and a jumper.

I am pretty sure, a player doesn't need an insane skill to reach 80 because if you can do a lot of goo things, you will need to put a lot of skill points on a lot of skills and that will mean increasing the overall rating. 

There is no problem about being conservative with the rookies, but you also need to open your eyes on the current skills set of the newcomers. Don't be conservative just for the sake of conservatism. 

No, we need to be conservative for the sake of conservatism. Why? Because rating changes don't happen over night. Rookies are erratic with their play. They get HOT and they get COLD. As we have already seen from Posringis this season. He has good nights, and bad nights. That is just how it is with young guys in the NBA.

To be an 80, in my opinion, you need to be consistent. Yeah, sure, you can have good nights and bad nights and be an 80, but on your worst night, you still need to perform at a high level enough to be an 80. 

If a player is voted an 80, and we change him, and he experiences degression, it will be  months before he is voted back down and changed again. Because we aren't quick enough on the changes. We aren't EA Sports putting out a new rating every week, would we like to be? Yeah sure, but that's a lot of work on our part to do something like that. 

Porsingis isn't an 80. He isn't 5 points worse than Serge Ibaka. He is about 8 points worse. You're living in a world where all you see are ESPN highlights and his big plays. You aren't seeing the nights where he barely shows up and does anything of substance. OR gets completely abused in the post or some wing goes by him on a pick and roll or he doesn't cover the weakside on a drive, or he doesn't force a perimeter player baseline. These are all simple fundamental mistakes he makes on a nightly basis, will he learn? Hopefully, but until then, he isn't an 80. He is basically a college player learning how to bang with the big boys, he is too raw, too unfundamental, he needs to develop. 

[Hanamichi Sakuragi]

Jan 18, 2016 20:42:15 GMT Charles Barkley said:

Jan 15, 2016 5:37:01 GMT Hanamichi Sakuragi said:

There is nothing insane about his skills right now. But basically, he is a long dude who can shoot threes, an above average rebounder, a good defender, a passable passer, with some post moves and a jumper.

I am pretty sure, a player doesn't need an insane skill to reach 80 because if you can do a lot of goo things, you will need to put a lot of skill points on a lot of skills and that will mean increasing the overall rating. 

There is no problem about being conservative with the rookies, but you also need to open your eyes on the current skills set of the newcomers. Don't be conservative just for the sake of conservatism. 

No, we need to be conservative for the sake of conservatism FOR ROOKIES. Why? Because rating changes don't happen over night. Rookies are erratic with their play. They get HOT and they get COLD. As we have already seen from Posringis this season. He has good nights, and bad nights. That is just how it is with young guys in the NBA.

To be an 80, in my opinion, you need to be consistent. Yeah, sure, you can have good nights and bad nights and be an 80, but on your worst night, you still need to perform at a high level enough to be an 80. 

If a player is voted an 80, and we change him, and he experiences degression, it will be  months before he is voted back down and changed again. Because we aren't quick enough on the changes. We aren't EA Sports putting out a new rating every week, would we like to be? Yeah sure, but that's a lot of work on our part to do something like that. 

Porsingis isn't an 80. He isn't 5 points worse than Serge Ibaka. He is about 8 points worse. You're living in a world where all you see are ESPN highlights and his big plays. You aren't seeing the nights where he barely shows up and does anything of substance. OR gets completely abused in the post or some wing goes by him on a pick and roll or he doesn't cover the weakside on a drive, or he doesn't force a perimeter player baseline. These are all simple fundamental mistakes he makes on a nightly basis, will he learn? Hopefully, but until then, he isn't an 80. He is basically a college player learning how to bang with the big boys, he is too raw, too unfundamental, he needs to develop. 

Just for the record I never said that KP deserves an 80, I am basically saying that skillset alone can push someone to that level. 

I think that's what you mean. My point is, skillset should be the exception to that one. If a rookie or even a veteran have shown versatility enough to warrant an 80, he should get it. Like KAT and KP. Yeah, consistency is a great barometer but you also need to give them the skillset that they are showing in real life, regardless of consistency. 

PS. I just realize that if we can only have a skill for consistency in the simulator, it will be a better world. 

[Charles Barkley]

Jan 18, 2016 20:49:02 GMT Hanamichi Sakuragi said:

Jan 18, 2016 20:42:15 GMT Charles Barkley said:

No, we need to be conservative for the sake of conservatism FOR ROOKIES. Why? Because rating changes don't happen over night. Rookies are erratic with their play. They get HOT and they get COLD. As we have already seen from Posringis this season. He has good nights, and bad nights. That is just how it is with young guys in the NBA.

To be an 80, in my opinion, you need to be consistent. Yeah, sure, you can have good nights and bad nights and be an 80, but on your worst night, you still need to perform at a high level enough to be an 80. 

If a player is voted an 80, and we change him, and he experiences degression, it will be  months before he is voted back down and changed again. Because we aren't quick enough on the changes. We aren't EA Sports putting out a new rating every week, would we like to be? Yeah sure, but that's a lot of work on our part to do something like that. 

Porsingis isn't an 80. He isn't 5 points worse than Serge Ibaka. He is about 8 points worse. You're living in a world where all you see are ESPN highlights and his big plays. You aren't seeing the nights where he barely shows up and does anything of substance. OR gets completely abused in the post or some wing goes by him on a pick and roll or he doesn't cover the weakside on a drive, or he doesn't force a perimeter player baseline. These are all simple fundamental mistakes he makes on a nightly basis, will he learn? Hopefully, but until then, he isn't an 80. He is basically a college player learning how to bang with the big boys, he is too raw, too unfundamental, he needs to develop. 

Just for the record I never said that KP deserves an 80, I am basically saying that skillset alone can push someone to that level. 

I think that's what you mean. My point is, skillset should be the exception to that one. If a rookie or even a veteran have shown versatility enough to warrant an 80, he should get it. Like KAT and KP. Yeah, consistency is a great barometer but you also need to give them the skillset that they are showing in real life, regardless of consistency. 

PS. I just realize that if we can only have a skill for consistency in the simulator, it will be a better world. 

Here is the thing that you do not realize, that you would see if you could see the rookie ratings. 

The rookies are built with those skill sets that they possess. KP has all of his abilities at the right level. The way we make him a 74 or whatever he first was, with his abilities that he has shown, is that everything else is really low.

For example, KP didn't show a lot of strength in his pre-draft evaluations, so, his strength is low. He didn't show a lot of passing or dribbling ability, so that is low. He did show an amazing shot, shot selection, and range, so his FG, 3PT, and O-Aware are high.

We build the rookies on a template. We define what we believe their best skills to be, and we make them. Say we have 1000 points to use. We build the strengths first. We make sure that he has all his skills that he has shown to us, and then we fill in everything else that are his weakenesses, or just average. 

When they get an increase like this, we then look at what he is doing well. Is his shooting better than we had expected? Honestly, no it isn't. We accounted for that already. But what we need to look at is, are his weaknesses that weak? The answer on KP is no, on some of them. So we adjust those.

You all need to have faith in the RC, that Walt and I, and Adam and J Hill are all doing a good job, an honest job. 

The rookies have good templates set up for them. The players we increase or decrease in the league, if it is their first change, we overhaul them and change them all around so that the SIM Player represents the RL player as much as possible, which is hard to do sometimes, be we try our best and put forth a lot of effort. 

[Hanamichi Sakuragi]

Jan 18, 2016 21:39:58 GMT Charles Barkley said:

Jan 18, 2016 20:49:02 GMT Hanamichi Sakuragi said:

Just for the record I never said that KP deserves an 80, I am basically saying that skillset alone can push someone to that level. 

I think that's what you mean. My point is, skillset should be the exception to that one. If a rookie or even a veteran have shown versatility enough to warrant an 80, he should get it. Like KAT and KP. Yeah, consistency is a great barometer but you also need to give them the skillset that they are showing in real life, regardless of consistency. 

PS. I just realize that if we can only have a skill for consistency in the simulator, it will be a better world. 

Here is the thing that you do not realize, that you would see if you could see the rookie ratings. 

The rookies are built with those skill sets that they possess. KP has all of his abilities at the right level. The way we make him a 74 or whatever he first was, with his abilities that he has shown, is that everything else is really low.

For example, KP didn't show a lot of strength in his pre-draft evaluations, so, his strength is low. He didn't show a lot of passing or dribbling ability, so that is low. He did show an amazing shot, shot selection, and range, so his FG, 3PT, and O-Aware are high.

We build the rookies on a template. We define what we believe their best skills to be, and we make them. Say we have 1000 points to use. We build the strengths first. We make sure that he has all his skills that he has shown to us, and then we fill in everything else that are his weakenesses, or just average. 

When they get an increase like this, we then look at what he is doing well. Is his shooting better than we had expected? Honestly, no it isn't. We accounted for that already. But what we need to look at is, are his weaknesses that weak? The answer on KP is no, on some of them. So we adjust those.

You all need to have faith in the RC, that Walt and I, and Adam and J Hill are all doing a good job, an honest job. 

The rookies have good templates set up for them. The players we increase or decrease in the league, if it is their first change, we overhaul them and change them all around so that the SIM Player represents the RL player as much as possible, which is hard to do sometimes, be we try our best and put forth a lot of effort. 

I don't have any problem about you RCs and your work. We are not contradicting each other, but we are also not in the same page in some matters.


Just to end this. Some rookies just deserve to be increase because of what they are showing in their first year in the league.