defensive ratings and O ranges are extremely suspect ( Wilt as midrange? did you have chimps sanity checking your formula results?) but I love reducing salaries (if only because I've been arguing for it for 3 years)

not a huge fan of the log5 as I suspect that the 60s guys went to the line at a higher rate than later era players

what made oscars def in his triple double season jump from 83 all the way to 98???

And I still don't understand what justified McHales defense dropping across the board

Yeah Oscar too was just as good as GP on defense. And he was as good as Frazier, Jordan, West, and so on.


Bottom line, how good a player was on defense isn't important at all anymore. All the good defensive players throughout history are just as good as the average/good ones. There are no shut down defenders.




Seriously, Defensive System needs work.

Jerry Lucas got a MAJOR across the board def bump, from the 70's into the 90's for more than a few seasons , Fat Lever now 100 D for the last 6 seasons of his career

Quote: Originally posted by hurley711 on 5/19/2008Jerry Lucas got a MAJOR across the board def bump, from the 70's into the 90's for more than a few seasons

Oh yeah, now suddenly Lucas isn't much worse than Bill Russell or Wilt on defense. Both are in the same category when it comes to defense right?

I will say though, everything else was good.


But Def. Ratings definately need work

I about choked when I saw a Philly version of Barkley as perimeter. Some arguments can be made for the later Phoenix and Houston versions as he would come off the dribble much more and do jump shots, but even then, he was the post-up/isolation guy that got to the paint all the time versus guys much bigger than him.

And at no point in his career does he deserve a 90+ defense. lol. Loved the guy, but he was never an elite defender.

94-95 Chuckster 99 D what a joke

You've got to be kidding me on Barkley.

Barkley was a defensive liability, and I believe his own coach said that. He didn't even try on defense. Most Sun fans will agree with me on this. I think some other Famous Analyst called out Barkley on his horrible defense as well.


And here he is ranked close to Russell some years. I mean come on

Quote: Originally Posted By seble on 5/19/2008
For those concerned with defensive ratings, here's the number of players for each 10 point range (includes all players):

0-10 1331
11-20 2067
21-30 2799
31-40 3031
41-50 2830
51-60 2365
61-70 1985
71-80 1615
81-90 1261
91-100 2130

Here's the breakdown for just draft eligible players:

0-10 657
11-20 1684
21-30 2457
31-40 2700
41-50 2517
51-60 2098
61-70 1768
71-80 1367
81-90 1053
91-100 1622

Add me to the list of people concerned about the defensive ratings. Dispersion just seems to be way off. The majority of players should be bunched together in the 40-60 range with much fewer outliers. How many defensive players were ever as good as Mutombo, Jordan, Mourning ect in their prime? And how far above the average and merely good defenders were these players?

I would think only 10-15 players in most years (less in earlier years with fewer team) would qualify as deserving of a 91-100 rating and perhaps only a couple at most of a 100 score.

Overall however I am big fan of the update. Nice work guys,

Scrooge

The general opinion seems to be that the changes made were great except for the defensive ratings, which suck, mostly in the direction of way too many 91-100 defenders. I agree with that concensus 100%.

I'm not starting a new team until they do something about these ridiculous new D ratings, that's how bad it is. The offensive range rating is bad enough, now it's just too much for me to take.

Quote: Originally posted by bball_jones on 5/20/2008I'm not starting a new team until they do something about these ridiculous new D ratings, that's how bad it is. The offensive range rating is bad enough, now it's just too much for me to take.

Cosign. The D Ratings are so bad, that it makes it so unrealistic.


"Charles Barkley is my defensive anchor and is just 1 rating point away from Bill Russell"
Someone can say that and it will be true.


So unrealistic

glove you really don't think about anything you say. your logic and thinking is so flawed it is laughable. im not just talking about the D ratings thing. i just mean in general.