Posted by rednu on 5/23/2016 6:19:00 PM (view original):
Posted by BDsaint785 on 5/23/2016 3:32:00 PM (view original):
Wish WhatIfSports could find a way to make height and weight relevant. It is in the real world. I understand that there are some excellent 6'7" C in college that a beast on the boards either because of their excellent ATH or brute strength and weight. As well as the 7'0" rim protector that either swats anything in the lane or at least alters a bunch of shots. Wish this could have some effect on the outcome of games for both Hoops Dynasties and Gridiron Dynasties.
The ratings are the relevance that you seek.
It isn't a case of the 7'0 guy with the 80 REB stat and the 6'7 guy with the 80 REB are equal because they have the same rating. The 6'7" guy has an 80 REB rating because he's that much better than the 7'0" guy that his awareness, instincts, physical strength, positioning, etc. compensates for the 5-inch height differential.
i agree with this - although i was 100% in the opposite camp for my first year or two.
although, i have to admit, potential kind of screwed this up - because potential is not tied in as well to height as ratings are. in the olden days, a 6'8 big man who was equally talented rebounding wise as a 6'10 big man might start at say 75 reb instead of 80. but then he might grow 2 inches in the off season and gain 4 points. but, i don't think potential works the same way, i don't think the potential of players is tied to height. a 6'6 guy should not be able to come in 72 reb with high potential unless hes gonna grow some more, and i don't think that part is taken in. the correlation between certain ratings and height/weight has DEFINITELY decreased as a result of potential.
i do still think it "fits" to think of rebounding, the rating, as the product of height, weight, and rebounding talent - where rebounding talent is hidden. it just doesn't shake out as well as it used to. but its definitely still true that players are not just randomly generated with ratings and height/weight all done individually - otherwise we would see 90 ath 1 def starting ratings on some players - and that never happens. i think instead, some underlying physical attributes are generated and then off of that, "talent" is randomized in further. the end result is a set ratings which sort of technically encompass multiple things, which is what makes it possible for certain ratings to be tied to each other - because they are constructed from some of the same components. how this is actually implemented by the designers, to accomplish the effect of tying ratings to each other and to height/weight, its not that important. i think WIS does a terrible job selling this reality - they just say, height/weight are window dressing - which, from the standpoint of trying to compare two players' rebounding abilities - is true, i guess. but its not true that height/weight have no factor in determining the rebounding ability of that player, its just that the rebounding rating shown is a composite that already factors that in.