Mason Plumlee

[Kevin Hollis]

Current = 76
Suggested = 81

As I mentioned in my trade thread, I think Mason Plumlee is due for a rating increase. Current stats are 11 ppg, 7.7 rbs, 1.2 blks, 4.3 assists, 1 stl, and a field goal percentage of .534. Mason has to be one of the top passing big men currently in the game behind Jokic, currently second in assists per game for centers. He doesn't have a flashy game, but he is a solid contributor in almost category. His only flaw is that he cannot shoot a free throw to save his life. 

[Jared Montini]

He is very diverse and doing well on my fantasy team! I vote 79

[Bryan Colangelo]

80

[Jeremiah Hill]

80 I think he's peaking but he's clearly a good player.

[Brian Scalabrine]

Above average finisher with no offensive range beyond that. From what I've seen, below average defensively. He is a terrific passer. 78

[Alex English]

78

[Andrei Kirilenko]

77

[Shane Battier]

80

[Walt Frazier]

81.5

[Kevin Hollis]

Right now his passing is at a 25, I would think it should be in the 60s - 70s at least. Not sure how many points to go into one rating change, but really I think his overall should prob be increased by three rating points alone just for his passing.

i just don't understand how people rate sometimes. He is clearly better than centers that we rate at a 78 like nerleans noel, biyombo, pachulia, Jefferson, etc. People always say the ratings of versatile  players need extra points, but aren't applying it here. He isn't the flashiest by any means, but hIs clear overall contribution to his team is relevant.

[James Kay]

Jan 24, 2017 12:41:42 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

Right now his passing is at a 25, I would think it should be in the 60s - 70s at least. Not sure how many points to go into one rating change, but really I think his overall should prob be increased by three rating points alone just for his passing.

i just don't understand how people rate sometimes. He is clearly better than centers that we rate at a 78 like nerleans noel, biyombo, pachulia, Jefferson, etc. People always say the ratings of versatile  players need extra points, but aren't applying it here. He isn't the flashiest by any means, but hIs clear overall contribution to his team is relevant.

Noel is way better defensively though. Not sure if that counts for enough rating points, though.

Either way though, i can go 79.

[Deleted]

83

[Kevin Hollis]

Jan 24, 2017 13:15:45 GMT James Kay said:

Jan 24, 2017 12:41:42 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

Right now his passing is at a 25, I would think it should be in the 60s - 70s at least. Not sure how many points to go into one rating change, but really I think his overall should prob be increased by three rating points alone just for his passing.

i just don't understand how people rate sometimes. He is clearly better than centers that we rate at a 78 like nerleans noel, biyombo, pachulia, Jefferson, etc. People always say the ratings of versatile  players need extra points, but aren't applying it here. He isn't the flashiest by any means, but hIs clear overall contribution to his team is relevant.

Noel is way better defensively though. Not sure if that counts for enough rating points, though.

Either way though, i can go 79.

It is more for people who are rating him 78 and below. I do agree Noel is better at d, but I don't think he is that much better to the point it makes them almost net equal to each other as you mention. My argument on the higher rating is due solely on his passing. To get his passing up to where it needs to be means he might have to take a hit categorically somewhere else, which I don't see where outside of free throws.

[James Kay]

Jan 24, 2017 16:03:19 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

Jan 24, 2017 13:15:45 GMT James Kay said:

Noel is way better defensively though. Not sure if that counts for enough rating points, though.

Either way though, i can go 79.

It is more for people who are rating him 78 and below. I do agree Noel is better at d, but I don't think he is that much better to the point it makes them almost net equal to each other as you mention. My argument on the higher rating is due solely on his passing. To get his passing up to where it needs to be means he might have to take a hit categorically somewhere else, which I don't see where outside of free throws.

Eh. I voted 79 (higher than Noel) but I actually don’t think Plumlee is better, so maybe I should lower my vote haha. This is my view of Plumlee, and maybe I’m wrong:
Mediocre-to-average at everything centers do (rebounding, defending, post-scoring, PnRs), with no shooting range and significantly above average passing. He’s not really bad at anything, but the only thing that stands out at all is his passing.
Whereas with Noel I feel he’s mediocre-to-average at rebounding and post-scoring, but is a better defender, more athletic, better at the PnR, and actually a decent passer himself, though I’ll give the edge to Plumlee in that regard certainly.

Also he actually is developing a decent jumpshot. It’s only halfway through a season which he started out injured, and has played limited minutes due to the Embiid and Okafor shitshow, but he’s increased his % of shots from 16>3 from 12% to 16% and actually increased his % on those shots from 23% to 54%, meaning that last year he hit just 16/71 from that range and this year has hit 7/13. Small sample size and could just reflect nothing at all but he’s a young player and I wouldn’t be surprised to see him develop that pick and pop type shop a la Ibaka.

I just went off on a tangent though. I think Noel is definitely more valuable for the current NBA and therefore “better,” though I don’t know if that translates into ratings points.

[Kevin Hollis]

Jan 24, 2017 16:33:46 GMT James Kay said:

Jan 24, 2017 16:03:19 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

It is more for people who are rating him 78 and below. I do agree Noel is better at d, but I don't think he is that much better to the point it makes them almost net equal to each other as you mention. My argument on the higher rating is due solely on his passing. To get his passing up to where it needs to be means he might have to take a hit categorically somewhere else, which I don't see where outside of free throws.

Eh. I voted 79 (higher than Noel) but I actually don’t think Plumlee is better, so maybe I should lower my vote haha. This is my view of Plumlee, and maybe I’m wrong:
Mediocre-to-average at everything centers do (rebounding, defending, post-scoring, PnRs), with no shooting range and significantly above average passing. He’s not really bad at anything, but the only thing that stands out at all is his passing.
Whereas with Noel I feel he’s mediocre-to-average at rebounding and post-scoring, but is a better defender, more athletic, better at the PnR, and actually a decent passer himself, though I’ll give the edge to Plumlee in that regard certainly.

Also he actually is developing a decent jumpshot. It’s only halfway through a season which he started out injured, and has played limited minutes due to the Embiid and Okafor shitshow, but he’s increased his % of shots from 16>3 from 12% to 16% and actually increased his % on those shots from 23% to 54%, meaning that last year he hit just 16/71 from that range and this year has hit 7/13. Small sample size and could just reflect nothing at all but he’s a young player and I wouldn’t be surprised to see him develop that pick and pop type shop a la Ibaka.

I just went off on a tangent though. I think Noel is definitely more valuable for the current NBA and therefore “better,” though I don’t know if that translates into ratings points.

I like Noel probably more than most people here, hence why I put the rating increase thread up. I think Noel is better in terms of steals and contesting %, and athleticism. I would give the nod to plumlee in rebounding, passing, and inside scoring-they are about even in blocks. I have never been a fan of saying a centers flaw is outside shooting-call me traditional I guess. Fwiw, athleticism to me is not a huge deal. Look at all of the players who are freak athletes, but are below average players. In fact, that's probably describing half the NBA right there.

[James Kay]

Jan 24, 2017 16:45:43 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

Fwiw, athleticism to me is not a huge deal. Look at all of the players who are freak athletes, but are below average players. In fact, that's probably describing half the NBA right there.

lol very true. It probably does account for more ratings points though

[Kevin Hollis]

Jan 24, 2017 16:48:12 GMT James Kay said:

Jan 24, 2017 16:45:43 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

Fwiw, athleticism to me is not a huge deal. Look at all of the players who are freak athletes, but are below average players. In fact, that's probably describing half the NBA right there.

lol very true. It probably does account for more ratings points though

I would be interested to know what the different factors in relation to x amount of points in rebounding relates to an increase in each position per rating. I am sure you are right that athleticism needs less points per rating increase than passing for a big.

[Deleted]

Bringing Plumlees passing from 25 to 85 where it belongs (40+ AST% is one of the best numbers in the league for any position) would increase his rating by 3 points by itself.

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 24, 2017 21:24:55 GMT @riogho said:

Bringing Plumlees passing from 25 to 85 where it belongs (40+ AST% is one of the best numbers in the league for any position) would increase his rating by 3 points by itself.

#1 - It's 15 categorical points = ONE OVR Point. So, if he did need 60 points on passing, he'd need a 4 OVR change right there.

#2 - This is something I've debated internally and with other RC members from time to time - I don't trust NBA Live Sim Engine enough to give a guy like Plumlee an 85. I think he'll end up giving out 8 apg with that rating (or, equivalent for this game, since it plays down assists anyway). I just don't trust that the game understands that just b/c passing rating is high, it doesn't mean that player necessarily will get that many assists relatively to the rest of the league with similar ratings.

I don't know. I suppose we could try it but I can tell you it's out of whack with every other change I've made. Normally, with this many assists, I'd give him about a 65-70 rating there. So, an 85 isn't NUTS but it's in the category where I don't usually give an 85 PASS until someone is getting like 7-8 apg IRL.

[Kevin Hollis]

Jan 25, 2017 1:05:55 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Jan 24, 2017 21:24:55 GMT @riogho said:

Bringing Plumlees passing from 25 to 85 where it belongs (40+ AST% is one of the best numbers in the league for any position) would increase his rating by 3 points by itself.

#1 - It's 15 categorical points = ONE OVR Point. So, if he did need 60 points on passing, he'd need a 4 OVR change right there.

#2 - This is something I've debated internally and with other RC members from time to time - I don't trust NBA Live Sim Engine enough to give a guy like Plumlee an 85. I think he'll end up giving out 8 apg with that rating (or, equivalent for this game, since it plays down assists anyway). I just don't trust that the game understands that just b/c passing rating is high, it doesn't mean that player necessarily will get that many assists relatively to the rest of the league with similar ratings.

I don't know. I suppose we could try it but I can tell you it's out of whack with every other change I've made. Normally, with this many assists, I'd give him about a 65-70 rating there. So, an 85 isn't NUTS but it's in the category where I don't usually give an 85 PASS until someone is getting like 7-8 apg IRL.

I see what you are saying. Just taking a look at passing ratings and league leaders in the sim and you can see that a passing rating of around 87 nets around 6.2 assists. Of course there are a million outliers in a simple stat like this, but it is something to go on. I would think his passing should be around a 72-75.

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 25, 2017 2:30:36 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

Jan 25, 2017 1:05:55 GMT Walt Frazier said:

#1 - It's 15 categorical points = ONE OVR Point. So, if he did need 60 points on passing, he'd need a 4 OVR change right there.

#2 - This is something I've debated internally and with other RC members from time to time - I don't trust NBA Live Sim Engine enough to give a guy like Plumlee an 85. I think he'll end up giving out 8 apg with that rating (or, equivalent for this game, since it plays down assists anyway). I just don't trust that the game understands that just b/c passing rating is high, it doesn't mean that player necessarily will get that many assists relatively to the rest of the league with similar ratings.

I don't know. I suppose we could try it but I can tell you it's out of whack with every other change I've made. Normally, with this many assists, I'd give him about a 65-70 rating there. So, an 85 isn't NUTS but it's in the category where I don't usually give an 85 PASS until someone is getting like 7-8 apg IRL.

I see what you are saying. Just taking a look at passing ratings and league leaders in the sim and you can see that a passing rating of around 87 nets around 6.2 assists. Of course there are a million outliers in a simple stat like this, but it is something to go on. I would think his passing should be around a 72-75.

Right, but we have real-life assist leaders who average 10.2, 10.4, and 11.6 assists per game, but in our league the top guys get 6.91, 7.30, and 7.33 assists per game. So you can't just aim at what will get him his Real-Life assist number, because in relation to everyone else he'd be getting more assists than he should.

[Kevin Hollis]

Jan 25, 2017 3:24:37 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Jan 25, 2017 2:30:36 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

I see what you are saying. Just taking a look at passing ratings and league leaders in the sim and you can see that a passing rating of around 87 nets around 6.2 assists. Of course there are a million outliers in a simple stat like this, but it is something to go on. I would think his passing should be around a 72-75.

Right, but we have real-life assist leaders who average 10.2, 10.4, and 11.6 assists per game, but in our league the top guys get 6.91, 7.30, and 7.33 assists per game. So you can't just aim at what will get him his Real-Life assist number, because in relation to everyone else he'd be getting more assists than he should.

I have a feeling I could slam this argument pretty hard if I go pull numbers from other stats and compare to real-life and sim players with similar ratings. 

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 25, 2017 3:37:57 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

Jan 25, 2017 3:24:37 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Right, but we have real-life assist leaders who average 10.2, 10.4, and 11.6 assists per game, but in our league the top guys get 6.91, 7.30, and 7.33 assists per game. So you can't just aim at what will get him his Real-Life assist number, because in relation to everyone else he'd be getting more assists than he should.

I have a feeling I could slam this argument pretty hard if I go pull numbers from other stats and compare to real-life and sim players with similar ratings.

Go for it. I'm not saying every rating we have is perfect. I make mistakes. I make concessions even more often (sometimes there just aren't enough points IMO for the player so things are all over the map).

But if you can shed light on how the Sim works with our ratings compared to real life, go for it. Be warned however, there is always the possibility of the Sim just being a maniac with no reason, sometimes. It clearly just doesn't believe in assists. I give people 90's in passing and Dribble and O-Aware and they get 7 assists per game or whatever. It's weird.

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 25, 2017 3:37:57 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

Jan 25, 2017 3:24:37 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Right, but we have real-life assist leaders who average 10.2, 10.4, and 11.6 assists per game, but in our league the top guys get 6.91, 7.30, and 7.33 assists per game. So you can't just aim at what will get him his Real-Life assist number, because in relation to everyone else he'd be getting more assists than he should.

I have a feeling I could slam this argument pretty hard if I go pull numbers from other stats and compare to real-life and sim players with similar ratings. Actually, I don't need to look, I know I can. Just look at the league leaders in the categories. Like me saying Towns needs to lower his offensive awareness and inside scoring because he is averaging 8 more points a game than in real-life.

Have to add, it depends how your team is built. Towns doesn't have Zach LaVine or Dieng or Wiggins or Rubio or (etc, etc, etc) on his team in this league. Who is to say he wouldn't at least take an increased scoring workload on a team built like the one Memphis has here?

Again, it's an inexact science but if you find anything fairly definitive, please share. I don't claim to know how this sim works in all ways.

[Walt Frazier]

Basically, try to take a general look at it.

Real-Life ppg leaders get 28, 28.6, 28.6, 28.9, and 30.8 a game.
D5 ppg leaders get 26.78, 27.43, 27.70, 29.86, and 31 a game.

Overall, not bad there.

Real-life REB leaders get 12.7, 12.9, 13.5, 14, and 14.2 a game.
D5 REB leaders get 11.1, 11.55, 12.3, 12.57, and 12.82 a game.

I am pretty sure those guys have some room to go in the REB ratings and perhaps things like Jump, but again overall, it's closer than assists.

NBA Blocks - 2.0 - 2.5
D5 Blocks - 2.35 - 2.86

NBA Steals - 1.8 - 2.3
D5 Steals - 2.2 - 2.5

So, both of those are a bit high, in the league in general I'd say. ALTHOUGH, I will say this Sim plays starters more, in general, than real-life players play. And again, team situation. Biyombo is starting and playing a lot in our league, but not in real life.

[Kevin Hollis]

I guess at the end of the day, I haven't heard the argument of x only gets such stats in the sim so y can't get such and such of a rating before now. I am sure you know ten time more than me when it comes to the rating system here, but it's just my point of view.

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 25, 2017 4:04:28 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

I guess at the end of the day, I haven't heard the argument of x only gets such stats in the sim so y can't get such and such of a rating before now. I am sure you know ten time more than me when it comes to the rating system here, but it's just my point of view.

At this point Kevin, generally, this is my process:

Try to figure out what real life stats equal what in game ratings.

Be as consistent as I can with those thoughts.

Let the sim do what it's going to do.

If I'm fairly consistent, then even if I'm wrong, at least it's consistently wrong, and fair to everyone.

[Mike Krzyzewski]

78

[Kevin Hollis]

Posted his third straight double double. I feel people are really underrating him.

[Charles Barkley]

Jan 25, 2017 4:04:28 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

I guess at the end of the day, I haven't heard the argument of x only gets such stats in the sim so y can't get such and such of a rating before now. I am sure you know ten time more than me when it comes to the rating system here, but it's just my point of view.

I think that is because we are trying to say that the sim is fucked up. 

If you think about it, the only time the sim league player should be averaging the exact same as he is in real life in the sim is if:

1. First he has to be rated completely accurately on that given day to what he is like on that same game in real life.
2. The team he is on needs to be the same in both RL and in game, and they too need to be rated accurately.
3. The team has to disperse their minutes in the same fashion as both RL and in-game
4. Their opponent must also follow rules 2 and 3.
5. The player needs to have the same stat opportunities in the game as in RL, i.e. both teams need to play exactly the same way, in both style, scheme, minutes, everything.

Everything needs to be the exact same in both the sim and RL in order for a player to produce identical numbers in the sim that aligns with the real life game. Then, and only then, can a fair assessment be made as to the player's rating and attribute distribution. 

Now those 5 things can all be correct, and the sim could still fuck it all up. That being said, think about how many of those things are different in the sim than in real life. I think the Warriors are the only team that have the same two teammates that are rated above an 82 as in game and real life. And I don't just mean the Warriors, I mean, say if the Rockets had KAT and Wiggins, then it'd be the same. But the other 10 guys likely aren't. 

So you have all these different factors that we just plain and simple can't control, which is why a player's sim stats will never be identical for a game as in real life, let alone a single season. Plus, we don't play the same schedule in the sim as we do RL, and there's another thing. 

Which makes the argument trying to compare how a player plays in RL to how they play in the sim, and then basing an increase on that, completely invalid. 

Instead, what we are left with is essentially a tier system. If player X falls into the top 25-30% of the stat, they get Y rating, and so on and so forth. However, assists are so fucked up. The sim is from the world of the ISO META, so it plays that way which is why assist numbers are so low. 

I don't think you are trying to make that argument, Kevin, but I am not really sure what you are trying to argue.