NBA 2K16 Player Ratings - Top Rated Point Guards (UPDATED)

[ojandpizza]

Quote: Originally Posted by MGSW

LMFAO. Did someone just say Westbrook is a better defender than Curry? Hahahababahahanahanababahabahahahahahahahahaha wtf? Come on man... this is just silly. Westbrook is a garbage defender. Well below average. He just covers up his ineptitude with fast hands and athleticism. Curry is only above average, but compared to Russ that's night and day. Smh. People need to watch more basketball.

So someone who doesn't share the same opinion with you doesn't watch basketball? I didn't watch Westbrook as much THIS YEAR simply because the Thunder weren't a great team due to injuries. I did watch plenty of Steph, plenty of Russ the past couple years, and watched both of them live in person.

I think he's better defensively. Curry plays on the best defensive team in the league which covers up any time he's man beats him or he makes a mistake. Westbrook in my opinion is slightly better, with quicker hands, and reads the passing lanes much better.

Neither is much above average, but Russ makes up for lots of that with athleticism. Curry looked much better this year defensively than he ever has, I still give the slight edge to Russ.. Even if we were to call them equal, Russ forces more turnovers and grabs more defensive rebounds.. Both equal more possessions for your team, both more valuable than a hand in your mans face.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sundown]

Quote: Originally Posted by ojandpizza

First lets just get off this whole team swapping/Durant thing. It's impossible to know how either player would do in either situation, and at the end of the day has absolutely zero to do with 2k ratings lol. And yes I do consider your inefficient spill over and over to be rambling and also greatly exaggerated.. Russ shot 43% on the year, Curry shot 48%. Do you realize how little of a difference that actually is? Let's say you and I played each other and we both took 20 shots. You shot the ball at Curry's percentage and I at Westbrook's.. You would only make one more shot than I would. That's really not anywhere NEAR the gap you're trying to make it out to be. Curry is definitely a better shooter, and his eFG% is going to be higher since it accounts for the 3 point shot. He's a great 3 point shooter, Russ isn't, pretty explanatory.. However you bashing people for looking at a box score while you're claiming extreme inefficiency is laughable, considering per 20 shots Russ would only miss 1 more than Curry would. And now the notion that Curry is the better passer.. Westbrook averaged more assists, which definitely that alone doesn't make him a better passer.. However not only did he average more assists, but his assists accounted for more points per game than Curry's did. Curry's passing accounted for a little more than 17 points per game while Westbrook's a little more than 19 per game. Not only is that interesting but can you take a guess at who Westbrook's top assist target was? What about Curry's? One was the best spot up shooter in the league, the other was Enas Kanter. Steph also played on the best offense team in the league, the best 3 point shooting team in the league. Russ still assisted for more points per game, even with the bulk of Curry's assists counting for 3 points rather than 2. Also they both averaged 56.10 passes per game.. So tell me again which players passing was more efficient? Also as already stated Curry played on the best offensive team in the league. Also the fasted paced team in the league which yields more opportunities for points, rebounds, assists, etc.. He also had "help" while Russ's was out with injuries.. As a result Curry had 44% of his shots assisted on, Russ only 23%. Meaning Russ carried the much larger burden of creating his own looks, which we can all agree is a tougher look than a teammate getting you open.. Which is the type of attention all those shooter's on GS constantly commanded. Actually 20% of Curry's shots were considered "wide open" with a defender 6+ feet away, only 9% of those shots were available to Westbrook. On shots outside of 10 feet Curry had 19% of his shots as "wide open" Russ had 7% of his wide open. 25% of Curry's looks were of the catch and shoot variety, while Russ only 6%.. You can see how much easier playing on a good team can effect your offensive efficiency. Despite that Curry averaged about .29 points per touch, Russ .31.. Also if you factor in their points generated by assists Russ was good for nearly 48 points per game. Curry 41 points per game. Considering GS averaged a league best 110ppg and OKC at 104, Curry was responsible for about 37% of his teams points, Russ 46% of his team points.. So which player was really the more efficient offensive guy? Especially considering what each had to work with.. It's a hell of a lot closer than you were making it out to be. And like I said I'm fine with Curry being the top rated guard, hell he was the MVP this year and he's a 2k cover boy. I just know that on individual ratings Russ and CP3 should have him beat on lots of areas. Russ would have all the athletic categories, he's a better defender, quicker hands, likely his steals and blocks higher, rebounds higher, post offense higher, post defense higher, Curry would definitely have him beat on shooting stats and ball handling.. I just assume, with him being a 93, that shooting is a very very very high factor in determining overalls, or he's pretty overrated on lots of the other categories simply to make sure he's the top PG on the game from an overall standpoint. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

First of all, I don't think you're really helping productive discussion labeling what I'm trying to put thought to as rambling, especially if your main counter is just quoting raw FG%. I feel most of this is basic basketball discussion if we want to talk about players as more than casuals.

Second, I want to make it clear that when I talk about Westbrook's inefficiency, I'm mainly talking abut his scoring and shooting efficiency which objectively cannot be debated, and certainly not dismissed as "rambling" if we actually care about objective discussion. However, I am NOT talking about his overall impact to the offense, to which he has been VERY good this year. If there was confusion I apologize.

Okay, with that said, even if we only talk about raw FG%, the difference between 43% and 48% shooting is HUGE.

That is the difference between a league leading offense and a league bottom offense. That is the difference between 100 on the score board at the end of the game and a 88-89. You might think that's just a raw 5% difference but it's actually around 12%. A 12 point difference is the gap between all-time great offenses and a mediocre one. 43% or below in high volume is chucker territory, and a team FG% of .48 and .43 is literally the difference between GSW (#1) and the Knicks (bottom 2) last season.

I'm obviously simplifying things but I'm trying to illustrate how the difference between 43% and 48% is NOT small, AT ALL.

Now this is even before we factor in 3 point shots, which is why raw FG completely misses the mark and usually gets dismissed quickly in any real discussion (and why Kenny Smith takes Barkley to task for not seeming to understand basic basketball math).

Raw FG% is WAY less helpful than TS% and eFG% which properly weighs a shot that is 50% more valuable than a two point shot. TS also weighs free throws, which you really should use because it favors Westbrook with his ability to get to the line. So let's look at TS:

Curry has a career TS above .60. This is in the greatness, all-time level. Durant also has a similar TS.

Westbrook has a career TS of .53. This is league average efficiency.

What this essentially means is that the more Westbrook is a larger part of the offense, the lower your ceiling as a team is. Now I've said repeatedly that Westbrook was actually incredibly impressive in being able to do that with high usage, but at the same time, his PER and box scores have to taken with a grain of salt because of his shooting efficiency.

Furthermore, you're actually making a stronger case against Westbrook (or rather for Curry) by pointing out that his primary pass target is Kanter. Kanter is a good offensive big, and good offensive bigs have high FG%. Curry passing to a great spot up shooter who shoots 40-43% does NOT help him actually get higher assist numbers than Westbrook does passing to a big who shoots 55-57%. Similarly, you can see how Curry's raw assist numbers were up a bit when he had a healthy David Lee to pass to. And it seems you completely ignored the assist to turnover issue, which again, is a classic measure of playmaking quality (CP3's is insane).

Now I want to get back to taking about Westbrook's overall impact to the offense. It's actually very, very good. No, not Curry or Harden or Durant levels of good, but it's actually very solid DESPITE his shooting inefficiency and poor turnover to assist ratio. His frenetic activity is amazing and it's impacting points on the board offensively. This is why I'm perfectly okay with him being rated an 89 and only a point behind CP3, and not okay with Melo being an 88.

You suppose that Curry has somehow been overrated in areas he shouldn't be, but again, 2K no longer has to overrate certain categories just to get player ratings to bump up. They can actually tweak the OVR calculation for offensive superstars to factor in shooting efficiency, as they absolutely should, because these guys are making off the chart impact with their shooting, regardless of how many other categories another player might be better in.

I wouldn't want Curry to be overrated in certain categories any more than you do. Westbrook absolutely should be higher in athleticism, penetration, ability to draw fouls, and of course rebounding. I completely agree with this outside of defense, where Westbrook's has been shown to be more aesthetic than impactful for a long time. 89 is elite and where Westbrook belongs, and it's insightful of 2K to avoid the trap of overrating due to 30 PER and triple doubles.

In the end, I feel the players are ranked properly and rated correctly for their overall quality as players and their impact. Your fear is that stat categories were messed up to make this happen, because that's what they did in the old system. I'm saying 2K has already been moving in a direction where they don't have to do that as heavily and if they adjusted the formula to reward GOAT shooting, this is actually a welcome thing. If Curry's stats were bumped up artificially to make this happen, I also would be somewhat disappointed even if the OVR feels right.

One more thing-- you're heavily underappreciating and unfairly discrediting Curry's game if you think he's efficient simply because he plays in the #1-2 offense, or that Westbrook is only inefficient a shooter because he's carrying the team.

That could not be farther from the truth when history is concerned.

Curry has been posting the same sorts of efficiency his entire career, whether in a #1 ball moving offense, or a league average isolation heavy offense-- whether coached by Keith Smart, a terrible offensive coach in Mark Jackson, or a great one in Steve Kerr. If anything, Curry makes a #1 offense possible even when it's so reliant on him to be the #1 option and even when he is the primary focal point of the opposing defense. Curry being some sort of "system player" is one of the worst myths to come out of GSW's incredible season, and shows a lack of awareness of Curry's game beyond this year.

Meanwhile Westbrook has been posting his league average .53 TS his entire career as well, regardless of whether HE was in a top offense or playing next to Kevin Durant, or whether he was the man carrying a offensively depleted team.

Curry is ridiculously efficient no matter what offense he is in. Westbrook is somewhat inefficient in all the same situations.

Pace doesn't really factor into things either. If anything, the primary purpose of efficiency metrics is to FACTOR OUT pace. If anything, pace HELPS Westbrook's stats-- OKC is #6, and that high pace is exactly what helps him achieve those gaudy raw box scores, point totals, and triple doubles, DESPITE his scoring inefficiency.

Again, this doesn't mean Westbrook's not still a hugely impactful player on offense, and that he can manage average efficiency on ridiculous usage is an achievement in itself. It's why he deserves his 89 for being a statistically net negative defender.

Anyway, I've tried to be clear and address all your particular points and somewhat clearly. If this is rambling, then I'm not sure I know how to do cogent conversation. Heh.

[Tvr750]

Where is brandon knight?

[teebee]

How is The Jimmer even ranked a 67!

[cbpo]

Quote: Originally Posted by ojandpizza

So someone who doesn't share the same opinion with you doesn't watch basketball? I didn't watch Westbrook as much THIS YEAR simply because the Thunder weren't a great team due to injuries. I did watch plenty of Steph, plenty of Russ the past couple years, and watched both of them live in person. I think he's better defensively. Curry plays on the best defensive team in the league which covers up any time he's man beats him or he makes a mistake. Westbrook in my opinion is slightly better, with quicker hands, and reads the passing lanes much better. Neither is much above average, but Russ makes up for lots of that with athleticism. Curry looked much better this year defensively than he ever has, I still give the slight edge to Russ.. Even if we were to call them equal, Russ forces more turnovers and grabs more defensive rebounds.. Both equal more possessions for your team, both more valuable than a hand in your mans face. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Curry is easily better defender. The warriors defensive rating was 97 with him on court vs 100.4 with off. This whole other players were hiding his defense is bull. Curry's defense this year was stellar and very disciplined. He was a plus defender on an already elite defensive team

MEANWHILE the thunders defensive rating was 105 with westbrook on the court and 100.4 with him off the court. 5 pts worse, westbrook was a very negative net defender meanwhile curry was a positive one. There is no factual evidence or argument over westbrook being a better defender.

They both averaged 2.2 steals per 36 as well so the forcing turnovers argument is also wrong.

Combine the EVIDENCE showing curry was a much better defender, in addition to curry's better assist to turnover ratio and a True shooting% a whomping 10% more of 63.8 vs westbrook's 53.6% the rating gap between them is perfect.

Also personally think kyrie/lillard were a bit overrated, most likely their defense is too high if I had to guess and I think jeff teague was a bit underrated. I think the PG ratings were the worse of all that were released but still overall the out of box ratings were much better this year by far compared to any other year.

[iLLosophy]

Quote: Originally Posted by teebee

How is The Jimmer even ranked a 67!

I know right. He should be at least a 68 if we're being honest

[DC]

Westbrook vs. Curry

Two different types of players COMPLETELY.

Why can't we leave it at that?

[mdyer0905]

How is Westbrook not a 90??? Im disappointed in you 2k