Size should play a role in winning games Topic

gillispie1
Posts: 5030 (0)
Hall of Famer
95
Veteran
i used to think the size thing was a pretty lazy hack, but a decent hack all the same. now, im not so sure its even a hack. 

when you look at a big man in college guarding a guard, yeah, a lot of times its a problem. why? because the big man is too slow to keep up. but there are some bigs who are very quick, very athletic, who can guard pretty much any guard in college without major problems. willie cauley stein on kentucky last year had no problems after switch offs following screens, when he had to guard a guard.

so, is it really height that makes things a problem? i think in that case, its more about the speed. in the flip side, big posting up a guard, i think size matters in raw form pretty obviously, but if you had a 6 foot guard who had the strength to keep a 7 footer from pushing him back, and could jump high enough to have a 99 shot blocking rating, i don't know, maybe he'd be fine. to me, if the game had a strength rating, it would be easier to see having height / weight reflected in shot blocking and strength, when it comes to posts getting defended by other guys, and having it all work out through the ratings. i would think that is reasonable. in this game, strength is part of ath and guards have 99 ath all the time so they don't really have enough variables to capture the depth of the game in that regard. but still. what im getting at is, the stereotypes about height very often don't apply, we see it all the time, its probably really more about the abilities the player has. to be able to rebound as a 99 rebounder at 6'6 your ability has to far exceed that of a 7 footer, but if both were truly 99, why should height factor in on top of that? im not convinced that capturing height through ratings isnt the best way to do it.
11/18/2015 2:30 PM
hughesjr
Posts: 3175 (0)
Hall of Famer
491 154 8 2
Prospect
Posted by gillispie1 on 11/18/2015 2:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by hughesjr on 11/18/2015 3:19:00 AM (view original):
Charles Barkley is one of the best rebounders of all time. He was 6-6. Dennis Rodman was 6-7 and rebounded even better than Barkley.

In the Bol example, he has terrible ATH.. But Rodman would be great at both ATH and REB. No doubt that Rodman out rebounds Bol every time.
tall players are MORE LIKELY to have better rebounding skills, nobody is saying they always will or always should.
Right.. But rebounding skills are then based on attributes and not size. As I think they should be.

And yes, taller players get better default rebounding numbers than shorter players, in general. Seven footers generally block shots better than 6'7 guys.. But the attributes tell you the answer.

As I think it should be
11/18/2015 6:18 PM
dahsdebater
Posts: 10041 (0)
Hall of Famer
284 290 18
Pro
The only place where I think there's a strong argument that the current system isn't working is in the scenario of guards defending against big men inside.  I do think size matters quite a bit there, and that this is poorly reflected in the way inside defenses is currently handled.  That being said, the number of teams across all divisions playing guards for substantial minutes at the post positions in any given world/season is in the neighborhood of 1, if not somewhat lower, so it's not a big problem.
11/18/2015 6:46 PM
udm_mike
Posts: 603 (0)
Hall of Famer
109
Rookie
Posted by buddhagamer on 11/17/2015 5:21:00 PM (view original):
By that logic, a player like Manute Bol should of been the most dominant player in the history of the NBA but he wasn't even a good rebounder.
Because of his (lack of) weight, which I assume the OP also wants taken into consideration.  Bol was still a great shot blocker.
11/19/2015 9:13 AM
poncho2799
Posts: 122 (0)
Hall of Famer
145
Prospect
Posted by the0nlyis on 11/17/2015 5:00:00 PM (view original):
I think I understand what people are trying to say.

They think that height isn't a factor enough than just being incorporated into ratings

they probably want a 7'0 C with 95 reb to dominate  a 6'7 C with 95 reb on the boards and defensively due to the 5 inch gap.

and not just have 7'0 players to be more likely to have 90+ reb/sb compared to the # of 6'7 players with 90+ reb/sb

There is how that is addressed. If we didn't see the height at all and the height was not already factored into the ratings the 2 players would look more like:

7'0" guy would actually be a 70 Reb, but gets to 95 with the height factored in
6'7" guy is actually an 85 Reb and gets to 95 with the height factored in.

Not sure why this is so hard to grasp.
11/22/2015 9:35 PM
bobaluba
Posts: 14 (0)
Hall of Famer
188 3 17
Prospect
I don't think that's the question.  I think the question is if a 7'0 guy and a 6'7 guy play against each other, all ratings are equal, should the 7'0 guy have an advantage? 
11/23/2015 8:21 AM
jsajsa
Posts: 631 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 28 1 133 3
Rookie
Posted by bobaluba on 11/23/2015 8:21:00 AM (view original):
I don't think that's the question.  I think the question is if a 7'0 guy and a 6'7 guy play against each other, all ratings are equal, should the 7'0 guy have an advantage? 
This question has already been answered. If all ratings are equal it's because the 6'7 is more talented but the fact that the other player is 7'0 bumped certain ratings up to equal the 6'7 guy.
11/23/2015 8:54 AM
bobaluba
Posts: 14 (0)
Hall of Famer
188 3 17
Prospect
I guess that's the issue. If these two players have to same talent level as well as ratings, I'm assuming this is only possible if the ratings are maxed out, does the 7'0 player have an advantage?
11/23/2015 9:30 AM
gillispie1
Posts: 5030 (0)
Hall of Famer
95
Veteran
Posted by bobaluba on 11/23/2015 9:30:00 AM (view original):
I guess that's the issue. If these two players have to same talent level as well as ratings, I'm assuming this is only possible if the ratings are maxed out, does the 7'0 player have an advantage?
if the two players have the same talent level, as well as ratings, then they are the same size. ratings = talent level + height/weight adjustment. so i can't exactly answer your question, you are asking about a situation which can not exist.

now, as in all sports games, 100 is a bit of a special number, in that it doesn't really makes sense, because in real life, players don't have hard caps. in any sports game, a player at 100, cannot improve (well, i guess there could be a sports game where the cap is not 100, but you get the idea). so, for example, in HD, you could have two guys at 6'10 who are 100 in reb, and one could grow to 7' and now they break the above equation. but that equation holds absolutely in every case where neither player is rated at 100. at 100 you can have all kinds of weird stuff, in theory, but in practice, very few players are rated 100 in anything so its not really an issue. you are talking about an edge case of an edge case.

11/23/2015 9:57 AM
gillispie1
Posts: 5030 (0)
Hall of Famer
95
Veteran
Posted by bobaluba on 11/23/2015 8:21:00 AM (view original):
I don't think that's the question.  I think the question is if a 7'0 guy and a 6'7 guy play against each other, all ratings are equal, should the 7'0 guy have an advantage? 
and the answer is no, because ratings = talent + height/weight adjustment, so by definition if the 6'7 guy has the same ratings as the 7'0 guy, then he is more talented, by the exact amount to offset the 7'0 player's height advantage. the reason there is no advantage to the 7'0 guy is because the 6'7 guy is more talented. if they were equally talented, the 7'0 guy would have an advantage, which would be reflected in the ratings. hopefully that makes sense!
11/23/2015 9:58 AM
bobaluba
Posts: 14 (0)
Hall of Famer
188 3 17
Prospect
Thank you, yes it does make sense. I guess my issue is its flawed. By that logic a 7'0 guy can never be as talented as someone smaller than him. Which really doesn't make much of a difference I terms of gameplay but still. I guess the bigger issue would be the amount of players maxing out ratings. Not only does it negate the height advantage of taller players but it negates the talent advantage of a smaller player as well.
11/23/2015 10:17 AM
gillispie1
Posts: 5030 (0)
Hall of Famer
95
Veteran
Posted by bobaluba on 11/23/2015 10:17:00 AM (view original):
Thank you, yes it does make sense. I guess my issue is its flawed. By that logic a 7'0 guy can never be as talented as someone smaller than him. Which really doesn't make much of a difference I terms of gameplay but still. I guess the bigger issue would be the amount of players maxing out ratings. Not only does it negate the height advantage of taller players but it negates the talent advantage of a smaller player as well.
what do you mean, he can never be as talented as someone smaller than him? of course he can. he can be more talented. if you have a 6'7 guy with 70 reb and 70 sb the 7'0 guy can have 95 reb and 95 sb in part because he is taller but mostly because he is way more talented. i think you are overthinking some part of this or something - or maybe you are only talking about the edge case for max ratings, not players in general?

for just maxed ratings, if thats all you are referencing, almost nobody hits 100 in anything. even on top d1 teams most players don't hit 100. now, in high d1, a lot do hit 95+, and in that 95-100 range i could see the ratings thing not exactly working out as one would hope, because the top tier of ratings go up very slowly, and height wont differentiate players much with similar talent in that range, either (so its not exactly just 100, im not sure what a reasonable cutoff is exactly, but its pretty high up there). so, you could look at this as a minor issue for a decent number of players in the upper levels of d1, or you could look at this as a minor issue for a negligible amount of players in the elite level of d1, depending on if you look at it being broken from 95-100 or just at 100. noting, of course, that having a hard cap of ability for ANYONE in ANY sports game is "broken" in a very similar way to what you describe. to me, this issue is just more of the same - its really more an issue of players having hard caps - more than it is an issue of size. and technically, many players hit their hard caps far below 100, if those players grow, and have already practice planned their way to maxing those ratings, then the growth won't reflect in the ratings, either. so really its a hard cap problem, not just a 100 problem, i never liked hard caps in potential, and now you've given me one more reason to feel that way (but still, i don't see it as a height problem, removing the hard caps would resolve all of this).



11/23/2015 10:42 AM (edited)
bobaluba
Posts: 14 (0)
Hall of Famer
188 3 17
Prospect
Yes exactly, I completely agree, the hard cap distorts the ratings. you're right, if the caps were removed that would solve the issue.
11/23/2015 11:15 AM
MonsterTurtl
Posts: 986 (0)
Hall of Famer
203 1
Rookie
But another thing with height is the difference between Peremeter defending and Low post defending, it's a completely different skill. I'm not 100% sure that defending is the same for Peremeter and Low post if that could be clarified that would be nice. But if height isn't a factor in gameplay, and Peremeter defending is the same as low post defending, then a 5 foot guard with 99 defense could shut down a 7 foot center with 60 low post when he's on the block and let's be honest here, that's just not realistic. So I'm wondering how anybody can argue that that isn't an issue, now if there is already a system in place for stopping that then count this little rant irrelevant. Also I think that Peremeter defense should be a different skill than low post defense because not only is it different mentally but it's different physically, Peremeter is all about quickness and anticipation and low post is all about lower body strength and toughness. As i am typing this i am remembering speed and its effect on defense on guards, but is there anything to effect defense in the post?
11/23/2015 5:00 PM
MonsterTurtl
Posts: 986 (0)
Hall of Famer
203 1
Rookie
That was a terribbly put together paragraph, my old English teacher would fail me.
11/23/2015 5:01 PM
◂ Prev 123 Next ▸
Size should play a role in winning games Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.