You Are Here > Basketball-Reference.com > BBR Blog > NBA and College Basketball Analysis

SITE NEWS: We are moving all of our site and company news into a single blog for Sports-Reference.com. We'll tag all Basketball-Reference content, so you can quickly and easily find the content you want.

Also, our existing Basketball-Reference blog rss feed will be redirected to the new site's feed.

Basketball-Reference.com // Sports Reference

For more from Neil, check out his new work at BasketballProspectus.com.

Layups: NBA 2K11 Ratings

Posted by Neil Paine on September 29, 2010

I'm admittedly a little behind the curve here, but I thought I'd throw some linkage to the player ratings for NBA 2K11 (which, as I was informed by a GameStop rep via phone-call several minutes ago, comes out midnight next Monday). Lots to disagree with there, so let me know in the comments what 2K's most egregious mistakes were... Also, for an alternate take, check out this blog where "Rashidi" offers his own (more reasonable) ratings. Happy gaming!

ShareThis

75 Responses to “Layups: NBA 2K11 Ratings”

  1. Sam Says:

    One big one that stood out on the first pass through was Ben Wallace rated as a 74, same rating as Kevin Love. There's no sense to these ratings, as other "defensive bigmen" (which is what I guess Ben Wallace is condsidered these days) such as Joakim Noah and Robin Lopez are both rated lower than Wallace (73 and 64 respectively). You can argue Lopez for sure, but Noah is better today than Wallace is today, no question.

    Dirk's (83) is pretty terrible, and Carmelo's (93) is way too high.

    #sarcasm#
    Of course, in a perfect world the rating would be based on their PER. PER of 30 = rating of 100.
    #/sarcasm#

  2. RobertAugustdeMeijer Says:

    Thanks for the link, but any chance that somewhere on the internet the complete stats have been posted? (I mean that long list of abilities that players have, like post scoring and perimiter defense, etc. Otherwise, I guess I'll just have to convince my local gamestore to let me "try out" the game. Imagine this scenerio: Him: "So... are you lgoing to buy game?" Me: "Nah, Carmelo Anthony's rating is too high")

    And of course, any chance that an NBA buff would bother, like Rashidi to make all those stats more accurate? (because I think subjective ratings are more accurate than statistics... what am I doing here actually?)

    I believe that defensive guys, like Noah, get low scores in the video game because the overall score is an average of all their abilities. They should make high ability scores weigh more than low ones.

  3. Panic Says:

    Kobe Bryant being tied for the best in the league is probably the most egregious error.

    Also, Carmelo Anthony is two points higher than Kevin Durant. Is there any possible justification for this?

  4. Ezell Says:

    Wow man. This blog is the best thing that has happened to my life.

  5. Jared Ras Says:

    I change the ratings anyway, and I get realistic games with a bunch of guys whose ratings look low.

    Some ratings look ridiculous. As a Bucks fan, I can say that Corey Maggette is not the 3rd best defender on the Bucks.

  6. Jared Ras Says:

    My bad, this link does not have defensive ratings or 4th-tier (specific) ratings.

    http://www.operationsports.com/newspost.php?id=446009

  7. TY Says:

    Their ratings are horrible,Durant is better than melo at this stage but he is not significantly better, niether are lebron or wade to kobe. Boozer,Amare,bosh all ranked higher than pau which is insane, maybe bosh but not all three. they have dirk two points higher than the rookie turner, whom they have ranked three points higher than J.wall. chris kaman the allstar is tied with the rookie demarcus cousin at 75, and they have d. collison with the same rating as Derrick Rose with 82.huh, I seen somenone trying to justify saying he was awsome when he started so what, so was andray blatche and he aint ranked higher than KG.

  8. Federico Says:

    Those are overall ratings and don't matter that much. For and accurate analysis you should look at the particular ratings of the players, taking into account the role they would play in your team.

  9. Federico Says:

    In that same page someone writes about how he doesn't care about tony parker's overall as long as he continues to be faster and more effective near the rim than most point guards.

  10. RobertAugustdeMeijer Says:

    Thanks for the video.
    Hmm... Boozer an 83 for defense and Varejao a 78.

  11. RobertAugustdeMeijer Says:

    Ugh, 73 for Boozer I mean

  12. JTaylor21 Says:

    You guys do know that the reasons for guys like Dirk and KD being rated the way they are is because when you account each individual attribute, those guys come up very short in areas like defense, athleticism, strength and etc. So individual ratings only tell a portion of the story because when you play vs a guy like Dirk, he's still going to get his 30 and same with KD.

  13. Dan Says:

    Rashidi's ratings really aren't much better.

  14. Ian Says:

    Nicolas Batum at 69 is pretty low for a guy who played so well last year.

  15. Gil Meriken Says:

    3. Totally agree. Kobe should be at the top by himself.

  16. Chronz Says:

    Ive spoken with Rashidi about his APBR based ratings on his blog, he puts in alot of time but saying hes an upgrade on 2K's system isnt very telling. His rosters value lies more in his player tendencies than his ratings, hes been on the scene since 2003 so there is no question hes committed, but I think some basketball talk outside the Video Game community will do his ratings some good.

  17. Anon Says:

    @ #15 If this REALLY mirrored reality, Kobe would be behind Pau Gasol in the player rankings.

  18. Nick Says:

    Anyone else notice that Centers were generally ranked far lower than other positions? I think the bottom 10 starters were all Cs.

  19. Gil Meriken Says:

    17. But then everyone else would be behind Pau Gasol, because Kobe is definitely better than all the other players in the NBA except Pau.

  20. Akg Says:

    I mean, you really do have to be a moron to think Gasol is a better player than Kobe Bryant.

    The ratings do have their faults, but generally I think they're ok.. Just took a look at Rashidi's ratings and they weren't really better nor were they more reasonable.

    I think Dirk is really underrated though.

  21. NintendoJones Says:

    @20: I guess that's true if you don't care about actual basketball production.
    Kobe should be like a 90, closer to Deron Williams than LeBron James. Melo should also be a little lower. He's probably the most overrated player in the entire NBA right now.

  22. EJ Says:

    I think Kobe should be number 1, because in 2k10 Kobe and Lebron were about the same overall, and Kobe averaged pretty much what he really does, but Lebron was getting like 34 points and 10 rebounds per game, so Lebron's ratings were overrated. And KD and Tyreke should be better. Those "real 2k insider" ratings are horrible. You can arguea who is better Kobe or Lebron, but in the game Lebron needs lower ratings cause he was gettin way too big numbers.

  23. Rashidi Says:

    First, let me say that I am INCREDIBLY HONORED to find my blog linked here. I use this website religiously and the majority of my ratings are formed from the advanced statistics found on this website. Thank you for this.

    Allow me to also give some clarifications since there are surely many users here unfamiliar with the basketball ratings.

    Each position is set to a different ratings scale, and each individual rating carries a different weight. For example, "ball handling" greatly affects a point guard's rating, while centers are minimally affected by this category. On the other hand, blocks/rebounds are important to centers, but not so much to PGs.

    I did not make the rating scales. The scales are created by 2K Sports. I merely input the proper data into the game, and out spawns the "overall" rating. If there are any overall ratings that do not pass the laugh test, it is because 2K's scale is not exactly perfect.

    For instance, a player like Dirk Nowitzki has high 3pt ratings. Dirk is also a great ball handler for a 7 footer. However because of his position (PF), he barely gets any credit for his abilities here, so much so that the scale being used is proven to be faulty. If a PF or C had a perfect 3pt rating (99), they would only increase in overall rating by 2 points. Same for the ball handling rating. So a PF/C with Allen Iverson's ball handling and Steve Nash's shooting stroke would barely be represented in the game.

    There isn't any workaround to this. At the end of the day though, overall rating does not matter. What matters is how the players play on the court, and between my ratings and player tendencies (how the A.I. players perform compared to their real-life counterparts), the players DO perform how they should on the court.

    The biggest difference between myself and 2K Sports over the last 7 years or so is that they will only adjust the star players (usually overrating them) and completely neglecting most backup players (most of whom are underrated). It shows to me that they do not have a hardcore NBA fan working on their rosters, which is why my work started getting followed back in 2003 in the first place. The fact that some bench players took YEARS to get changed is simply lazy because it takes mere seconds to change ratings, and there are MANY players in the game with clear and obvious faults to even casual NBA fans.

    Anyway, thanks for reading! If you have any questions or would like any further clarifications, let me know! I'll be checking this post now, or just hit me up on the blog which was already linked above.

  24. Rashidi Says:

    Now to respond to some posts...

    Post#1: It's not so much that Big Ben is overrated, it's that Noah and Lopez (as well as the majority of most other centers) are very underrated. Wallace has high ratings because he was a big name that is on the way down. Lopez was a second year player, and unfortunately, 2K has shown that they don't review the statistics for each player at the end of each year (even though they claim to have "Living Rosters" that are updated weekly). All one has to do is look at his stats page on this site and see 17.6 PER (15.3 for career) and .621 TS% (.601 career) to know something is amiss.

    Also, believe it or not, 2K Sports actually has OVERRATED Dirk. Dirk has rebounding and block ratings that are far too high because they are trying to compensate for their faulty PF rating scale. They receive complaints about this every year, and I think at this point it would be worth it for them to just scrap the scale for that position and re-work it entirely. The league is going in a different direction where bigs have to have a perimeter game now - teams are employing stretch fours/fives more than ever before. Some teams even value this more than a traditional back to the basket game (which generates huge rating boosts for frontcourt positions).

    Carmelo Anthony exhibits another flaw in 2K's ratings and how they go about them. Instead of relying on statistics, 2K actually relies on the fans to suggest changes, which is going to lead to popular players getting high ratings compared to less popular players. Melo is one of these key examples of a player who gets a lot of hype because he scores a lot and is an exciting player to watch, but a closer look reveals less than impressive results (compare his USG and TS% to Kevin Durant... then compare their Synergy data on Offense/Defense if you have it...).

  25. Rashidi Says:

    Post#5 - The Bucks are poorly represented in the game because they have exactly the type of players 2K knows little about - role players. They are also a small market team which means there are fewer fans lobbying them for higher ratings (truth be told, most of the neglected teams are small market teams - just check out Minnesota, Sacramento, etc).

  26. Rashidi Says:

    Post #7 - Those are actually my ratings and not 2K's. Most of your complaints are fairly common and the logic for each is as follows.

    Durant/Melo: Behind .607 TS% and 32.0 USG%, Durant showed himself to be a scorer on LeBron James' level this season. Melo posted .548 TS% and 33.8 USG% which is a considerably worse ratio. Quite simply, Melo is not an efficient basketball player, and those numbers are very similar to what Durant put up as a sophomore (.577 TS% and 28.0 USG%). Durant elevated his game... something we really haven't seen from Melo in the last 5 years. Not to mention, Melo's defense is atrocious. Synergy Sports in particular shows that Melo is essentially the 2nd worst defensive player among all stars in the league (ahead of only Gilbert Arenas, who missed two years with knee injuries).

    Collison/Rose: Rose is the worst starting PG in the league at threes and steals. That hurts his overall rating greatly. It boggles my mind that people are still sleeping on Collison but that's what playing in a minor market will do for your media hype.

    Gasol/Bosh/Amare/Boozer: It isn't insane at all, as Gasol is hardly the perfect bigman. He is the worst shooter of those four, as well as the least athletic. There's a reason he couldn't win a playoff game until he joined a certain team. Gasol is NOT a franchise player and it always amuses me that people (usually Laker fans, naturally) think he should be rated as such. Heck, the only one of those guys he's a better rebounder than is Amare! Those guys are all better scorers too, lest we forget that Gasol's scoring efficiency only went through the roof because he became a second banana.

  27. Rashidi Says:

    Post #16 - like I said Chronz, I'm all over the place. I had a lot more time for posting when I was younger... my edit time has also increased over the years tenfold as 2K continues to add more and more categories... IIRC 2K's history...

    2K1 - Never played, this was a Dreamcast title and I had PS2.
    2K2 - Rented this one 3 years later just to check the ratings (just to use as a reference point), but found that none existed - players had ability bars, and you couldn't adjust their skill levels.
    2K3 - First 2K game with numerical player ratings that were editable. Things were very elementary back then, as most ratings were only graded in multiples of 5.
    2K4 - No new ratings.
    2K5 - No new ratings.
    2K6 - Shooting tendencies added.
    2K7 - Additional tendencies added (Back to Basket, Triple Threat, etc)
    2K8 - Athleticism ratings added (Strength, Vertical, Hustle, etc), as well as the very important "Shoot Off Dribble" and "Shoot In Traffic" ratings.
    2K9 - More tendencies added (behavioral actions like setting picks, many others).
    2K10 - More ratings added (Ball Security, Consistency, etc), AND the rating system was completely overhauled from 50-99 scale to 25-99 scale.

    Things aren't as simple as they used to be when I was a kid posting on forums talking basketball all day... between holding a steady job, attempting to maintain a social life, etc... at the end of the day this is just a time-consuming hobby for me (which is why I would LOVE to make it my full-time job, as I'd be killing two birds with one stone, interacting with other basketball fans and viewing basketball related media all-day long without having to worry about how I eat dinner this week).

  28. Rashidi Says:

    Post #22 - Per game stats are affected just as much by player and team tendencies as they are by player ratings - tendencies have ZERO bearing on overall rating.

    Besides, isn't judging rosters on paper the same as judging players solely by their stats?

    The people that download them are rarely disappointed with the on-court product.

  29. EJ Says:

    Ok Rashidi, your latest roster for 2k10 was pretty good, CP3 and Pau were a little underrated, like CP3 got only like 17 ppg and 9 apg and Pau had only 15 ppg, but I gotta admit that your roster was better than the offical roster.

  30. Chronz Says:

    Im sorry Rashidi but I just cannot comprehend how you have absolutely no time to discuss the sport your attempting to rate and are suppose to love. I would think it would be to your benefit that you engage in debates with those in the know, rather than those with the game. Dont get me wrong, fan input is important and Im sure there are plenty of fans who do know the game intimately, but I would value the opinion of these guys more than anyone else. Also in this day and age couldnt you combine all aspects of your life in some way shape or form. For example, at this very moment I am both taking a dump and online. Imagine that... to a less revealing degree, Ive been online while at work. Or while on the way to the airport, or while taking my dog on a walk, etc... Surely you can do the same if you really wanted to. Personally I just think your love for the video game overwhelmed your love for the game.

  31. Anon Says:

    "There's a reason he couldn't win a playoff game until he joined a certain team. "

    Um, because the Lakers are a better TEAM than the Grizzles??????

    Sigh. Love it when people use team records to analyze individual players.

  32. Anon Says:

    "17. But then everyone else would be behind Pau Gasol, because Kobe is definitely better than all the other players in the NBA except Pau."

    Gil, there are plenty of Kobe stan boards on the web you can go to if you want to worship the altar of Kobe. This site is a place for objectivity, evidence, and facts. And the fact is that Kobe is NOT the best player in the league. Post #21 nailed it on the head, Kobe is more like a 90 player than a 99 if the ratings reflected reality.

  33. Rashidi Says:

    Im sorry Rashidi but I just cannot comprehend how you have absolutely no time to discuss the sport your attempting to rate and are suppose to love.

    Work.
    Sleep.
    Social life.
    Watching basketball.
    Research.
    Editing rosters.
    Blogging.

    I do not have time to scour the entire internet looking for debates. I interact with my target audience because they are the ones most often asking me questions, or clarifications on my research/opinions. I read quite a bit about the NBA from a number of quality sources. My work speaks more for my credibility more than I can, and I prefer it that way.

    Recreating your favorite basketball season (as you did) is NOT the same as keeping up with an active season. The entire league must be constantly analyzed for a 6 month period. If you think you could throw your hat into the ring and keep up, be my guest.

  34. Rashidi Says:

    Personally I just think your love for the video game overwhelmed your love for the game.

    I watched 80 of the 82 Knick games last season, as well as a great majority of the TNT/ESPN games, some Nets games, some NBA TV games, most of the playoffs, not to mention watching game recaps on youtube.

    If I didn't love the game, I wouldn't be doing this for a video game. I don't have anything to prove, because like I said, my work speaks for itself. I'm not a technological wizard obsessed with altering game data. I'm a rabid NBA fan since the age of 10.

  35. Rashidi Says:

    Um, because the Lakers are a better TEAM than the Grizzles??????

    Sigh. Love it when people use team records to analyze individual players.

    The same exact thing can be said of
    1. People who think Kobe is as good as LeBron/Wade because the Lakers won the championship
    2. People who think Gasol is the best PF in the league because the Lakers won the championship

    My point was Pau Gasol showed on the Grizzlies that he is no franchise player. Players like Amare and Bosh are much closer to fitting that bill, and would have just as much success (if not more) if they played for the Lakers.

  36. Anon Says:

    "My point was Pau Gasol showed on the Grizzlies that he is no franchise player. Players like Amare and Bosh are much closer to fitting that bill, and would have just as much success (if not more) if they played for the Lakers."

    So Gasol is not as good because he doesn't create the most shots for his team? Come on now, we all know that player production is alot more involved than that. Dude wasn't even in his prime on the Grizzles anyway (as well a s having injury issues) and he still put up all-star player production. He had a brilliant first playoff series against the Spurs in '04 and the Grizzles got swept; those teams collectively underachieved in the playoffs regardless of Gasol's performance. Now he is on the Lakers in his prime, and has one of the best combinations of usage and efficiency in the league. And as best exemplified in Game 7 of the Finals, he and not Kobe is LA's most valuable player.

    Until I can see what Bosh can do in the playoffs, I'll take Gasol over Bosh/Amare/Boozer. And this is NOT based on him winning a ring at all.

  37. Gil Meriken Says:

    32. "This site is a place for objectivity, evidence, and facts. And the fact is that Kobe is NOT the best player in the league."

    LOL. And in case you need an explanation: Statement 1 claims that the site is a place for facts. Fine. Statement 2 then posits a qualitative judgment ("NOT the best player") as a fact.

  38. Anon Says:

    "LOL. And in case you need an explanation: Statement 1 claims that the site is a place for facts. Fine. Statement 2 then posits a qualitative judgment ("NOT the best player") as a fact."

    You can turn this into a petty argument over semantics (the tactic often used by people when they can't back up their arguments with solid evidence) but you know exactly what was implied by my post.

    If you want to live in your own subjective world where Kobe is your king and ruler, and was the best player in the league ever since he stepped onto a basketball court as a 19 year old, then by all means. But the objective evidence from the 2010 season has Kobe as more of a top 10 player than top 1. And with him at age 32 (and often injured), he isn't even LA's most important player going forward much less the league's best player.

  39. Gil Meriken Says:

    38. I would say that the tactic most often used by people when when they can't back up their arguments with solid evidence is an ad hominem attack (for example, implying that one is an idolater of a mere athlete).

  40. Anon Says:

    You are welcome to call it whatever you want. But as far as determining whether or not Kobe is the league's best player, you're on the wrong side of that argument where the evidence is concerned.

    As usual though, Kobe fans can't settle for putting the man where he actually IS among the NBA ranks, and use team achievements and subjective "intangibles" to back up their points.

  41. Gil Meriken Says:

    41. I can settle for putting Kobe where he actually IS among the NBA ranks.

  42. EJ Says:

    Kobe is the best in the league, the most complete player since MJ. Kobe's biggest weakness is his shot selection, and that hurts his stats, and this site is based on stats, but stats aren't everything. I give the most respect to players that have the winners mentality and drive, and I don't think Lebron James really has that, the past 2 years he's been showing that. If Lebron had it, he would be SICK, I mean imagine if Kobe had Lebron's body and athletic ability. DAMN. Anyways, people look at this thing differently, some look at stats, some look at the stuff that doesn't show in the stat sheet. I say Kobe, you might say Lebron or KD.

  43. Gil Meriken Says:

    And also 40.

  44. Anon Says:

    "I can settle for putting Kobe where he actually IS among the NBA ranks."

    In the top 10? Agreed. Because he ISN'T top 1, top 3 or top 5.

  45. Anon Says:

    EJ, the cliche "stats aren't everything" phrase is a cop-out for looking at subjective criteria that cannot be verified. It's for those who don't bother looking at evidence, which obviously puts Kobe more in the top 10 of players than the top 3 with James, Wade, and Durant (from 2010), or top 5 with Paul and Howard. Of course his avid fans would balk at that.

    The Lakers had the best team in 2010. Not the best player.

  46. Gil Meriken Says:

    45. So you're saying Kobe is not the best player, and that the evidence supports that conclusion?

  47. Anon Says:

    Talking to some Kobe fans is like talking to a brick wall. At least brick walls don't reply with puzzling posts.

    The hard evidence leads to that conclusion. Of course, it is repulsive to those who evaluate players by what the entire 12-man roster does as a team when it wins championships, but the "rings argument" is flawed to begin with. Then again, Kobe fans NEVER cared for this argument until the Lakers won recently, and that's because they flip flop more in their reasoning than politicians. Before 2009, "Kobe is best" because of the production (which is still false anyway); now he's the best because his team won the title? Remember when these same people laughed at Paul Pierce after 2008 when he called himself the best player in the world, right after the Celtics won the title?

    These guys love to contradict themselves.

  48. Gil Meriken Says:

    48. Talking to people who claim that you did things that you didn't do is puzzling.

    These guys like to make up examples of things you did not do, or things that other people did, and ascribe them you, or lump you into a group to which these things are ascribed.

  49. Gil Meriken Says:

    47. "Kobe fans NEVER cared for this argument until the Lakers won recently, and that's because they flip flop more in their reasoning than politicians."

    Talking to people who claim that you did things that you didn't do is puzzling.

    These guys like to make up examples of things you did not do, or things that other people did, and ascribe them you, or lump you into a group to which these things are ascribed.

  50. Anon Says:

    Nice try Gil. But the Kobe fanbase has done NOTHING but keep their guy on top using whatever argument helps them at the time, even if it means contradicting themselves later. Before 2009, "Kobe was the best player, he was just on a bad team that played the ". Now it's "Kobe's the best because he won the ring!" A load of flip-flopping is always expected from this fanbase and it's laugh out loud funny to the rest of the basketball world.

    Anyway, they were actually more on the right track with their former line of reasoning than the latter. Some people love using titles to rank players, but it's about as smart as ranking players by using the all-time scoring list.

  51. Gil Meriken Says:

    51. "Anyway, they were actually more on the right track with their former line of reasoning than the latter. Some people love using titles to rank players, but it's about as smart as ranking players by using the all-time scoring list."

    Okaaaaaay, and how do I fit into this?

  52. Gil Meriken Says:

    And 50 too, gotta stop doing that.

  53. Anon Says:

    Don't even pretend that you're putting Kobe at #1 because of actual on-court production. Because it's not on par with some others in the league.

    The only way Kobe fans even argue for Kobe is by using the TEAM accomplishment of a championship that was achieved by the Lakers (and not a single player). Which, once again, fans never always used to argue for Kobe in the first place.

  54. Gil Meriken Says:

    53. This is what happens when you assume.

  55. Gil Meriken Says:

    53. And before you even ask me what my argument is, let's take a look back and note how illogical your thought process is:

    First, you take what is an opinion (X is or is not the best player), and state it as incontrovertible fact. Second, you proceed to attack me ad hominem, calling me a "worshipper" of Kobe because of my views. Third, I haven't expressed my criteria for best player, so you incorrectly ASSUME what it must be. Fourth, I can't take your opinions seriously because of the tone of your posts and your belief that the "evidence" is indisputable.

  56. Anon Says:

    It IS a fact. What do people ultimately use to determine who the best players are? How much these players help their teams win when they are on the court. We can DIRECTLY determine this by pulling from multiple sources of information about their production.

    If you're not interested in the hard evidence, then whatever you use to support your argument (and I don't have to assume here, I've heard it all before from Kobe fans) is based on either the flawed "rings criteria" or arbitrary, subjective opinion...such as the Lakers win because of Kobe's scowl. I mean, just LOOK at it! That makes him the obvious GOAT!!!

  57. Gil Meriken Says:

    56. I have to assume you are slow now, or just deliberately obtuse. You keep referring to the "Kobe Fanbase". Who are these people? Am I their leader? When did I ever do any of the things you are attributing to the "Kobe Fanbase"? This is like you claiming that I believe in the the Easter Bunny because another guy who once said Kobe was the best also believed in the Easter Bunny. Your reading comprehension is rather poor, because I think you are attempting to argue against me by actually addressing other people's arguments. It's really odd, and makes me question your judgment and faculty of reasoning. Please if you ever have the time, go back and read my posts only, and then read yours, and (hopefully) you will see the things you are accusing me of have no basis either in any of my comments or in reality.

  58. Anon Says:

    "Your reading comprehension is rather poor, because I think you are attempting to argue against me by actually addressing other people's arguments."

    I've seen every pro-Kobe argument in the book. Doesn't matter what you have to say about this.

    Whatever your argument is, it isn't gonna be based on production. Because that doesn't favor Kobe.

  59. Dnicest1 Says:

    As far as Minnesota being underrated. I find Wesley Johnson and jonny flynn to be incredible in this game

  60. Gil Meriken Says:

    58. You have a very poor grasp of logic.

  61. Anon Says:

    Gil, if you can provide hard evidence for Kobe being the best player in the league that doesn't involve the usual subjective b.s. or use the flawed and ridiculous "ring argument" then I'm all ears.

    If not though, your argument has no merit. This isn't the site to tell us how Kobe's scowl and "mythicall instinct" makes him the best player.

  62. Gil Meriken Says:

    61. I don't have any "hard evidence". Here's the rub, which you don't grasp: neither do you. Unless you consider your winshare, your plus/minus, all of your individual "production" measures, to be hard evidence, all of which are softer than a block of cheese in the midday sun. Quantifying something into a number does not make it "hard", the quality of the data is what is at question. You can take piece of poop and mold it to look like a brick of gold, but it's still poopy. Individual statistics in basketball have a loooong way to go in terms of quality and expansion before you can start considering them valid. I have a math degree, which is does not make me any more of an expert than anyone else, I just point that out to explain that I am not afraid of statistics, and that I also know when it is valid to apply them.

  63. Anon Says:

    That's what people often say when the numbers don't agree with whatever preconceived notion they have in mind about a certain topic.

    Gil, the numbers presented track the things that ACTUALLY TAKE PLACE ON THE COURT. You can complain about "lack of perfection" all you want, but it is EVIDENCE. Not only that, it is evidence complied from multiple sources that cover areas that other stats might miss. You gather all the data together and it gives you all the important and relevant information that you need about the player on the court, where the game is decided and wins are recorded.

    It's your choice to discount the evidence, but I would rather have actual, objective data to work with than NO data and a subjective, unprovable opinion about the player of my liking. Caron Butler is my favorite player to watch. I would LOVE for him to top a list where he's better than Kobe Bryant and ever other player in the league, but - alas! - the data doesn't support my opinion.

  64. Gil Meriken Says:

    63. You and Sarah Palin have much in common, including a lack of reason.

  65. Anon Says:

    That's fine. Regardless of your lame insults, the objective evidence STILL says Kobe is not the best player in the league.

    Thanks for playing.

  66. Curtis Blow Says:

    Carmello was the third leading scorer in the league last season (AHEAD OF KOBE) and carried the nuggets all season so how the heck is his rating to high? if anything it should be higher. Clearly you dont your players. but other than that i do disagree with the ratings the majority of the players got.

  67. Gil Meriken Says:

    65. That's what people who don't know what "objective evidence" is say to people who do understand what it is.

    Nice try, thanks for participating.

  68. Anon Says:

    Why are you even here if you're such a numbers skeptic Gil? Are you already bored of the million Kobe fan sites that you probably should be visiting instead?

    But if the um, EMPIRICALLY derived data doesn't satisfy your obvious bias, you can always make up your own stat that makes Kobe the best player in the league. Granted, it wouldn't have anything to do with figuring out how the game works on the court, but since it's all about making the evidence fit your theory instead of the other way around...

  69. Gil Meriken Says:

    68. I'm not a numbers skeptic (as I mentioned before I have a math degree, so I'm not exactly opposed to numbers), I'm an individual players' numbers (and their application) skeptic. The team analysis is very valid - because it's clear what the objective of the team is, and it's very easy to measure - score more points that the opposing team. With individual players, it's not so clear, the numbers currently being used for analysis (including plus/minus) do not accurately reflect the contributions of each player. For example, a player does not score a point - it's a combination of the player and his team, and for every player and play that mix is different, the same goes for every box score statistic, rebounding, assists, everything.

    If the empirically derived data for individual players is junk, you're going to get junk output.

    Thanks for trying. Stick to science. Basketball stats are not as "hard" as you are making them out to be. Rebounds are not equivalent to an observation of velocity in physics. Counting assists is not like counting heads in a census survey. I believe in gravity. I don't believe the way that individual statistics are parsed gives any meaning in a team basketball sense. Has nothing to do with Kobe. Even if your view of the world (just data manipulation, almost numerology, which is objective with its set of rules to follow) said Kobe was the best, it still wouldn't be valid.

  70. Anon Says:

    "I'm an individual players' numbers (and their application) skeptic."

    Which makes you a numbers skeptic (and it is in this sense I meant in my post).

    Obviously it is a team sport, but there are ways to attribute credit to individuals for what they do on the floor. Don't think you're the only one who has thought about the issues that you presented. But you treat it as a round peg in a square hole problem, which it is not - especially if you build your models based on observing how the game works on the floor.

  71. Travis Yaylor Says:

    UGH. major issue..

    my game will not get past the first screen. i “press start” and it goes to “Checking HDD Space” and will not get past it. And i have a playstation three any help please
    and it is also nba 2k11

  72. Neil Paine Says:

    Never happened to me, but my PS3 HDD is nowhere near full... This thread might help:

    http://www.ihav.net/vb/games/my-game-keeps-glitching-checking-hdd-space-1433620.html

  73. Travis Yaylor Says:

    but how do i delete my games

  74. Travis Yaylor Says:

    i deleted some game but still not working

  75. jeu Says:

    Is it just me, or are fast breaks horrible??? What Center, or any other player in the league do you know consistently catches up to Derrick Rose, Shannon Brown, or John Wall on a fast break? Yet whenever I play with these teams and my player breaks away all alone in the open court for what in real life is an easy dunk or lay up, it seems at least 2 of the opposing big men somehow get into position and squash the break! Why do runaway lead men on run towards the sidelines instead of straight toward the basket for the outlet pass for an easy dunk or lay up??? Why is dunking so hard? I hope NBA 2K12 fixes these issues...