Just another example of how poorly the big board rankings are designed. This player is currently #84 and falling. He was recruited as the #1 SG and made it to his senior season relatively easily. His ratings have been maxed out since somewhere in his junior season.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=4804645

Ath: 100
Spd: 100
Reb: 48
Def: 98
SB: 52
LP: 62
PER: 59
BH: 74
PAS: 93
WE: 80
STA: 98
FT: B

ehhh, horrible no, not necessarily great, but could be with the right cast... but he's obviously a pg, and a championship caliber one at that. or a championship caliber sf depending on the team and cast

Posted by georgerollin on 9/27/2021 10:38:00 AM (view original):
He is a horrible SG

Thanks George. Your little comments really warm me up, like a sunrise cresting the Rocky Mountains. When I see your name, I know the dark, bleak night has finally turned to dawn. It's a dawn full of hope and shared memories with friends. Don't ever change.

i would definitely support a tweak to the pg formula. some players it rates meaningfully too high, others drastically too low. i just had a great pg barely get drafted at like 105 on the board, probably an elite pg, its hard with pgs to draw the line though because the max ceiling on pgs is uniquely insane. but i'd call him elite (quality starter for a championship level team), he was much like yours. had other pgs higher on the board who were vastly worse. so much of the pg formula turns on per, it really doesn't make a ton of sense.

Posted by gillispie on 9/27/2021 10:53:00 AM (view original):
ehhh, horrible no, not necessarily great, but could be with the right cast... but he's obviously a pg, and a championship caliber one at that. or a championship caliber sf depending on the team and cast

I just mean that he should probably be a top 15-20 pick in the draft as opposed to going towards the end of the 2nd round. Absolute elite defense and fairly efficient scorer on high volume. I think he's hovered around 60% TS% his entire career while carrying the offensive load in probably the toughest conference in Allen.

His stats would be better but I changed offense/defense sets in his sophomore season. Plus I'm not a great team builder so that cast wasn't always there. Currently I'm starting 4 PG's and he's at SF.

i don't think i'd go as high as 15-20, an ideal end result IMO would still see lp-based scoring at the 1/2 valued meaningfully lower than 3pt scoring. but he's clearly way too low. probably end of first round for me

Posted by georgerollin on 9/27/2021 10:38:00 AM (view original):
He is a horrible SG

Wait…could you change a 5 star PG’s position to center to tank the big board?

The Big Board is definitely LP/PER driven. Personally, I'd love to have the OP player any day of the week. But having said that, as far as the way the draft works, I understand why he was selected where he was selected

Edit...... where he WILL BE selected

Posted by gillispie on 9/27/2021 11:38:00 AM (view original):
i don't think i'd go as high as 15-20, an ideal end result IMO would still see lp-based scoring at the 1/2 valued meaningfully lower than 3pt scoring. but he's clearly way too low. probably end of first round for me

Hmm, this makes me think that I'm over-valuing him, and maybe this is why I haven't won a championship yet lol.

its less about his value than having a cohesive big board. the big board setup is a handful of linear formulas - its not going to be perfect in edge cases. this guy SHOULD be an edge case, IMO - its just that the current PG / SG formulas are so heavily per driven, and so lp-agnostic, that there's a clear balance issue. the most premium guards are per scorers, and the rankings should reflect that - a guy like yours, or the one i just had barely drafted 58th / 105ish big board despite being slightly better outside stamina, should always be a bit of a discount (your guy is probably better w/ stamina)

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerHistory/Ratings.aspx?&pid=4837449

anyway, i think these guys can be real good, but its definitely harder from a team planning standpoint to incorporate such players into a championship level rotation, than the elite guards with per scoring. i would be fine if your guy was a high end 2nd round guy even, or mine, but they should be automatic selections as seniors, i feel like having guys like these missing the draft and barely making it, its too far.

maybe bottom of first round was too high - quality wise, i think that's about the right spot, but for big board cohesion, probably earlier in the 2nd is better. here is an example of a guy who i had drafted around 50 on the board as a junior, bottom of the first round (26), who is substantially better than your guy or mine, objectively but especially from a team composition standpoint. granted, this is roughly a perfect package - about as good as players get in this game. so his draft spot was low too. but still, the point is, there's a couple echelons between a pg like this and yours and mine, and he was low 1st round too.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerHistory/Ratings.aspx?&pid=4234143

Posted by gillispie on 9/27/2021 12:20:00 PM (view original):
maybe bottom of first round was too high - quality wise, i think that's about the right spot, but for big board cohesion, probably earlier in the 2nd is better. here is an example of a guy who i had drafted around 50 on the board as a junior, bottom of the first round (26), who is substantially better than your guy or mine, objectively but especially from a team composition standpoint. granted, this is roughly a perfect package - about as good as players get in this game. so his draft spot was low too. but still, the point is, there's a couple echelons between a pg like this and yours and mine, and he was low 1st round too.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerHistory/Ratings.aspx?&pid=4234143

From your examples, I might just be overrating athleticism at the guard positions. To me, Johnson is an ideal SF, which is where his 100 spd/ath would be most utilized, and also where he fits best from a team composition standpoint. He can better be surrounded by shooters at the 1/2 and even backup 3. Maybe part of the problem is that the BB formulas aren't sophisticated enough to consider some of the nuances of a player's actual value. Or maybe the formulas just aren't very good. You're pretty certain that he's on the PG formula?

Sometimes the big board ratings arent as whacked as the recruiting ratings

Posted by mullycj on 9/27/2021 12:51:00 PM (view original):
Sometimes the big board ratings arent as whacked as the recruiting ratings

I didn't mention him being the #1 SG as an expectation that he'd be drafted higher. It was just to show that his starting ratings were already very good as a freshman. He didn't start low and then have crazy rating gains over his career, which might have kept him off the BB as a sophomore or junior.