Posted by kmasonbx on 10/6/2011 10:37:00 PM (view original):

Still missing the point guys. I'll repost what my main point is:

From a matchup standpoint a guy with a 6 inch height advantage and 40+ pound weight advantage will have an enormous physical edge but when height doesn't matter and we are just looking at ath/sp/D/blk rating to decide how good of a defender somebody is it doesn't tell the whole story.

Posted by ryrun on 10/7/2011 10:08:00 AM (view original):
I'd like my players' hair color to matter.  I'd recruit a team of gingers that would run rampant on WiS... everyone would be afraid to guard them.

Posted by dahsdebater on 10/7/2011 2:08:00 AM (view original):

Posted by kmasonbx on 10/6/2011 10:37:00 PM (view original):

Still missing the point guys. I'll repost what my main point is:

From a matchup standpoint a guy with a 6 inch height advantage and 40+ pound weight advantage will have an enormous physical edge but when height doesn't matter and we are just looking at ath/sp/D/blk rating to decide how good of a defender somebody is it doesn't tell the whole story.

a) there are examples where this hasn't been true; in many cases good defenders have shown the ability to very effectively guard much larger players

b) regardless, why does it really matter?  The game works how it works and I virtually never even bother to notice how tall my players or anybody else's players are.  Why get so hung up on it?

B is kind've a silly way to look at the game. If that were the case why should we complain about anything? If the game works how it works, we should just accept everything about it? 

Of course there are examples of smaller guys doing a good job against a bigger guy but it isn't the norm. There is a reason why nobody could guard Shaq in his prime, and why Wilt was the same way.

I just don't understand why you would have height and weight listed and then it not matter when the game is played. The way the game works a guy can give away 8 inches in height, 60 pounds in weight but if he's more athletic and faster with a high D rating he will likely do a great job guarding a talented scorer. I don't even think it should be that hard to implement, just have it act as a multiplier for certain ratings. Since the ratings aside from ath/sp are supposed to indicate a player's technique and not necessarily how well they perform in a certain area. I would say for things like LP/Blk/Reb/D should all have a multiplier. So a 7'0 guy with a 99reb will rebound better than a 6'6 guy with the same rating. I'm not saying it should be drastic but at least have something in there to make height/weight relevant.

Posted by kmasonbx on 10/7/2011 12:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 10/7/2011 2:08:00 AM (view original):

Posted by kmasonbx on 10/6/2011 10:37:00 PM (view original):

Still missing the point guys. I'll repost what my main point is:

From a matchup standpoint a guy with a 6 inch height advantage and 40+ pound weight advantage will have an enormous physical edge but when height doesn't matter and we are just looking at ath/sp/D/blk rating to decide how good of a defender somebody is it doesn't tell the whole story.

a) there are examples where this hasn't been true; in many cases good defenders have shown the ability to very effectively guard much larger players

b) regardless, why does it really matter?  The game works how it works and I virtually never even bother to notice how tall my players or anybody else's players are.  Why get so hung up on it?

B is kind've a silly way to look at the game. If that were the case why should we complain about anything? If the game works how it works, we should just accept everything about it? 

Of course there are examples of smaller guys doing a good job against a bigger guy but it isn't the norm. There is a reason why nobody could guard Shaq in his prime, and why Wilt was the same way.

I just don't understand why you would have height and weight listed and then it not matter when the game is played. The way the game works a guy can give away 8 inches in height, 60 pounds in weight but if he's more athletic and faster with a high D rating he will likely do a great job guarding a talented scorer. I don't even think it should be that hard to implement, just have it act as a multiplier for certain ratings. Since the ratings aside from ath/sp are supposed to indicate a player's technique and not necessarily how well they perform in a certain area. I would say for things like LP/Blk/Reb/D should all have a multiplier. So a 7'0 guy with a 99reb will rebound better than a 6'6 guy with the same rating. I'm not saying it should be drastic but at least have something in there to make height/weight relevant.

Posted by kmasonbx on 10/6/2011 10:37:00 PM (view original):

Still missing the point guys. I'll repost what my main point is:

From a matchup standpoint a guy with a 6 inch height advantage and 40+ pound weight advantage will have an enormous physical edge but when height doesn't matter and we are just looking at ath/sp/D/blk rating to decide how good of a defender somebody is it doesn't tell the whole story.

Posted by girt25 on 10/7/2011 3:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kmasonbx on 10/6/2011 10:37:00 PM (view original):

Still missing the point guys. I'll repost what my main point is:

From a matchup standpoint a guy with a 6 inch height advantage and 40+ pound weight advantage will have an enormous physical edge but when height doesn't matter and we are just looking at ath/sp/D/blk rating to decide how good of a defender somebody is it doesn't tell the whole story.

A 6'8' can make a play like that. I think you're getting caught up in the fact that it's a hook shot and, really, that stuff is just window dressing and not at all meant to be analyzed as closely as you are trying to. And as someone pointed out, particularly since it's a zone, you can get blocked from the side or behind. (Reminds me of my legendary moment senior year of high school when I blocked my buddy's shot from behind, he was captain of the basketball team, 6'6" and seven inches taller than me ... it happens.) 

Among issues in HD, this might rank in the top 500. It might not though.

You guys don't see his point at all?  I understand why you wouldn't put a guy with low reb at PF or C, but a 5'11" 160lb PG with 90 ath, 90 spd, and 90 def will be able to effectively guard a 7'0" 300lb C with 70 ath, 40 spd, and 75 lp.  I understand that a low SB will make him less effective, but in reality he would get dunked on 9 out of 10 times.  I'm not saying the game can be made better from that standpoint, but you'd have to be pretty blind (or stubborn) to not acknowledge that there is a serious disconnect from reality there.

Posted by isack24 on 10/7/2011 4:36:00 PM (view original):

You guys don't see his point at all?  I understand why you wouldn't put a guy with low reb at PF or C, but a 5'11" 160lb PG with 90 ath, 90 spd, and 90 def will be able to effectively guard a 7'0" 300lb C with 70 ath, 40 spd, and 75 lp.  I understand that a low SB will make him less effective, but in reality he would get dunked on 9 out of 10 times.  I'm not saying the game can be made better from that standpoint, but you'd have to be pretty blind (or stubborn) to not acknowledge that there is a serious disconnect from reality there.

Posted by isack24 on 10/7/2011 5:29:00 PM (view original):
I already said it doesn't make sense from an overall aspect to play a PG at C because of the reb.  Obviously the other C would get a crapload of offensive rebounds and putbacks. 

Getting back to the substance of the post: that a PG with those ratings could effectiively guard a C with those ratings in the halfcourt (rebounding aside).  Do you disagree with that?  I'd be a little surprised if anyone would. 

If you isolate simply that aspect, it seems a bit ludicrous, no?

Posted by dacj501 on 10/7/2011 5:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 10/7/2011 5:29:00 PM (view original):
I already said it doesn't make sense from an overall aspect to play a PG at C because of the reb.  Obviously the other C would get a crapload of offensive rebounds and putbacks. 

Getting back to the substance of the post: that a PG with those ratings could effectiively guard a C with those ratings in the halfcourt (rebounding aside).  Do you disagree with that?  I'd be a little surprised if anyone would. 

If you isolate simply that aspect, it seems a bit ludicrous, no?

I didn't realize this was "isolate tiny little aspects of a basketball game.ifsports.com"
Line up all those PGs and let them guard a C for a game and see what happens. When they don't stop the big man (even if its ALL put backs) remind me why we are having this philosophic discussion... Or maybe I don't know what you mean by "effectively guard"