Posted by rsvphr on 11/20/2019 10:33:00 AM (view original):
Don't have any numbers but I was originally told ATH affects LP, DEF, SB, REB, and SPD affects DEF, PER, BH, PASS.
i would definitely recommend not thinking about things this way - at least not past the early phases of coaching.
ath and speed are not multipliers to ratings, as whoever posted earlier said. when the sim engine runs, ratings are smashed together into aggregates, which are then used to make comparisons - very rarely would you see things like, a single rating from 1 player being compared to a single rating of another. i call these aggregates 'abilities'. this both simplifies things, and brings the way we talk and think about the game, more in line with how it actually works.
for example, 3 point shooting ability is what the engine would use when a player takes a 3. this is comprised primarily of per, bh, and speed, with IQ and fatigue level in basically every aggregate (so i won't mention them every time, but know they are omni-present).
defense is not defense. the defense rating means nothing in a vacuum. i do talk about a 'defensive ability', but i use that as shorthand - what i really mean, is the interior defensive ability, for post players, and the per defense ability, for guards (with a mix of both for SFs, if you will). this allows one to talk about a defensive ability for a player, without getting overly wordy. this 'defensive ability' would primary run off of def, ath, spd for guards, and def, ath, and blk for bigs.
still, the above is a simplification. particularly in press, where turnover generation is a vital part of defense - this is primarily run off of spd, then def, then ath.
anyway, even though abilities are a simplification, and deeper dives are necessary, at least it brings you to a point where you are thinking about something that at least somehow relates to what actually makes a player good. i often suggest to people i help, to think of 4 abilities per player - offense, defense, rebounding, and guard skills - with 3 cores for guards (minus rebounding), and 3 cores for bigs (minus guard skills). to built elite teams, every player needs 2 clear strengths, of the 3. this is sufficient, in general, to win championships. however, if all that offense is, for example, 2 point scoring, that is still not going to be enough. but in general, my 'two strengths' model holds up extremely well - there is no possible way to construct a rule around ratings, that is nearly as concise, or nearly as accurate.
on the other hand, when i talk to someone, and its like - why do you or do you not like that player? they'll say something like, well he isn't that fast. so what?? what do you need him to do, and how does that speed impact what he does? is it that you need him to be a good defender? if so, you really need to consider the ath and def in conjunction with that speed - just because your high d1 guard caps at 70 speed, that doesn't mean he can't still be a great per defender, with his 95 ath/def.
i may not be explaining this very well, but in short - ratings mean nothing by themselves. there is almost no rating you can consider in a vacuum, the closest thing is probably rebounding in bigs, or passing in a pg. but still, its much better to try to understand the actual abilities in play. for a point guard, for example, the 'guard skills' abilities take two forms - getting team mates better open looks, and avoiding turnovers. getting team mates open looks purely runs off of passing and iq (of course, also fatigue level), while avoiding turnovers is primarily bh and pass (possibly small impact from ath/spd, probably, and of course iq and fatigue - i only mention explicitly iq in the getting team mates open looks part, because its such an important ability, and because iq plays a bigger role in that ability than almost any other ability). note that ball handling also plays a role in a guard's scoring ability.
if you understand the reasons that ratings actual matter, which comes down to, by definition, understanding the abilities, the aggregates actually used by the sim engine - you will get way further than if you just think about ratings as a silo. they aren't silos, and even great coaches make mistakes constantly getting hung up on a rating. you can't even talk about the importance of a rating as a silo, it totally depends on the role of the player, is he a defense-guard skills oriented pg in a press defense? is he a scoring type pg in a man defense? the implications can be pretty huge.
in short, even though a rating sounds simpler, so much context is needed to appropriately place that rating, that they become almost meaningless. meanwhile, the abilities can have a much broader appeal. if we talk about what makes a big man a good rebounder, some folks might need rebounding from a particular big more than others, but the concept of what actually makes a big a good rebounder, that is fairly universal. the concept of what makes a guard a good 3 point scorer is fairly universal. your situation changes, but i don't need to know that context to talk about whether a player is good at a certain function or not. contrast this to a rating, where it is impossible for me to talk about the value of the rating without knowing your situation, in a brief manner - i'd have to talk about the value of that rating in all functions where it applies, it just gets so messy. instead, we just over-simplify which leads to poor coaching decisions.
abilities are the answer!