|
|
Post by Minnesota Timberwolves on Jan 11, 2010 0:31:34 GMT 2
So as some of you have heard I have this idea that in my opinion we should do a group rating update. It would go something like this, we take 2 teams each day, see if there are any ratings that doesn't seem right and suggest what should be changed. We would update those ratings when all teams would be done. But, we would not update every players rating for the sake of just changing, it wouldn't make sense, so 1 point to one way or the other way seems useless, as it wouldn't make that much of a change and you got to remember that I have to do all these changes later  . Anyway, I made this thread to ask you guys if we should do it then or not. Vote on the polls and, it's not necessary, but recommended, post your opinion about it. |
|
|
|
Post by New Orleans Hornets on Jan 11, 2010 3:36:40 GMT 2
If by Mid-season u mean the all star break ... i'd vote yes, any other time i'd vote no!
|
|
|
|
Post by New York Knicks on Jan 11, 2010 3:37:51 GMT 2
yea that sounds good, i agree with New orleans
|
|
|
|
Post by Denver Nuggets on Jan 11, 2010 12:41:44 GMT 2
Wow.interesting.....Alright I agree...............
|
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Jan 11, 2010 13:21:29 GMT 2
sounds good, voted yes
|
|
|
|
Post by Sacramento Kings on Jan 11, 2010 14:13:47 GMT 2
I'm all for it
|
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Clippers on Jan 11, 2010 17:19:07 GMT 2
I voted no, we should know the ratings before the season and stay there until the next season. It's also more work for the admin, ask Miami he still hasn't done his rating updates! |
|
|
|
Post by blue on Jan 11, 2010 23:40:47 GMT 2
I agree with Clippers, would rather wait till the season is over.
|
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Jan 12, 2010 1:30:24 GMT 2
Midseason change would be more realistic, no is more arcade-ish version.
So Yes voters want one and No voters want the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Clippers on Jan 12, 2010 3:22:23 GMT 2
Midseason change would be more realistic, no is more arcade-ish version. So Yes voters want one and No voters want the other. Exactly how is midseason changes realistic? Players get better little by little all the time, obviously we can't do that. You've heard of guys "working hard in the offseason" that's the time you get better. I guess you never played sports in high school, just think about it for a second. |
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte Bobcats on Jan 12, 2010 9:08:39 GMT 2
Voted yes. Tired of Dirk blocking and stealing more than Gerald Wallace
|
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Jan 12, 2010 12:28:39 GMT 2
Midseason change would be more realistic, no is more arcade-ish version. So Yes voters want one and No voters want the other. Exactly how is midseason changes realistic? Players get better little by little all the time, obviously we can't do that. You've heard of guys "working hard in the offseason" that's the time you get better. I guess you never played sports in high school, just think about it for a second. I play basketball since 6th grade. lol. Yeah offseason is the bigest change, the in season thing wouldnt be as big, and players get better and worse in a season, thats what it is, you just dumm. Ahh where are idiots born. :S you talk bullshit. |
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Clippers on Jan 12, 2010 16:40:51 GMT 2
Exactly how is midseason changes realistic? Players get better little by little all the time, obviously we can't do that. You've heard of guys "working hard in the offseason" that's the time you get better. I guess you never played sports in high school, just think about it for a second. I play basketball since 6th grade. lol. Yeah offseason is the bigest change, the in season thing wouldnt be as big, and players get better and worse in a season, thats what it is, you just dumm. Ahh where are idiots born. :S you talk bullshit. So you agree with me in a sense, but you obviously have lack of reading skills. I guess I'll say it again, the most realistic thing would be to update the ratings like every game. A player is a little banged up, or does drug, he isn't as good. A player goes up a little shooting or something, he is better. We obviously can't do that and don't know when exactly these players improve. Why change impact the season with "mid season rating changes?" I bet you money the order won't finish the same order we would have before as far as standings. That's okay though you can just call me "dum" and think you are a badass, other GM's have open minds. PS. To Bobcats, changing the ratings at midseason is not going to fix that problem lol. It's either a fluke, Dirk's block/steal is too high, or Wallace's is too low. |
|
|
|
Post by blue on Jan 12, 2010 16:41:18 GMT 2
I just like waiting till the off-season to change the ratings because some people have done trades in the past for players with higher ratings then they should have. So the person might have traded two players with 70 overall who deserve a rating boost, for someone rated 77 who deserves a rating decrease, and now they are screwed since the two players he traded could both become 77's and the person he traded for could become a 70.
Though, it seems like most people in the league are more favoured to having the mid-season rating change. So mine and Clippers arguments could mean nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Timberwolves on Jan 12, 2010 18:33:16 GMT 2
I play basketball since 6th grade. lol. Yeah offseason is the bigest change, the in season thing wouldnt be as big, and players get better and worse in a season, thats what it is, you just dumm. Ahh where are idiots born. :S you talk bullshit. So you agree with me in a sense, but you obviously have lack of reading skills. I guess I'll say it again, the most realistic thing would be to update the ratings like every game. A player is a little banged up, or does drug, he isn't as good. A player goes up a little shooting or something, he is better. We obviously can't do that and don't know when exactly these players improve. Why change impact the season with "mid season rating changes?" I bet you money the order won't finish the same order we would have before as far as standings. That's okay though you can just call me "dum" and think you are a badass, other GM's have open minds. PS. To Bobcats, changing the ratings at midseason is not going to fix that problem lol. It's either a fluke, Dirk's block/steal is too high, or Wallace's is too low. In my opinion it wouldn't be very realistic to do daily updates on player, as players have good days and bad days, so player might be 60 on one day and 90 the other day. But I do think doing one during the season is quite important. That's because when the ratings were done before the season, we didn't know how well each player will play. Like take Gallinari for an example, he was thought as a bust even before the season and he had only 68 rating and even that was back then doubtful, but he proved himself and have had a great year, so him being rated that low isn't right imo. Now as the half of the season has passed by we have much better view how good the players really are, especially compared to October. Chicago, well to be fair, that's a good sign of a GM, when you just don't do the trades to win tomorrow, but look more to the future. When I do trades, I usually don't even look at the ratings, I look at player talents, how good they could become, if they are declining etc. It's quite shortsighted, when you just care for the ratings. |
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Clippers on Jan 12, 2010 20:39:26 GMT 2
So you agree with me in a sense, but you obviously have lack of reading skills. I guess I'll say it again, the most realistic thing would be to update the ratings like every game. A player is a little banged up, or does drug, he isn't as good. A player goes up a little shooting or something, he is better. We obviously can't do that and don't know when exactly these players improve. Why change impact the season with "mid season rating changes?" I bet you money the order won't finish the same order we would have before as far as standings. That's okay though you can just call me "dum" and think you are a badass, other GM's have open minds. PS. To Bobcats, changing the ratings at midseason is not going to fix that problem lol. It's either a fluke, Dirk's block/steal is too high, or Wallace's is too low. In my opinion it wouldn't be very realistic to do daily updates on player, as players have good days and bad days, so player might be 60 on one day and 90 the other day. But I do think doing one during the season is quite important. That's because when the ratings were done before the season, we didn't know how well each player will play. Like take Gallinari for an example, he was thought as a bust even before the season and he had only 68 rating and even that was back then doubtful, but he proved himself and have had a great year, so him being rated that low isn't right imo. Now as the half of the season has passed by we have much better view how good the players really are, especially compared to October. Chicago, well to be fair, that's a good sign of a GM, when you just don't do the trades to win tomorrow, but look more to the future. When I do trades, I usually don't even look at the ratings, I look at player talents, how good they could become, if they are declining etc. It's quite shortsighted, when you just care for the ratings. Yeah exactly, some days Kobe is an 80 (maybe) and some days he is a 99. The human element can't be simulated, so we have to go by a rating system. What you are suggesting would be like playing Monopoly, then half way through taking a monopoly from one person and giving it to the other. In my opinion we ought know what is going for the whole year then switch it in the off season, you used Gali as an example...what is the harm in waiting half a season? You know when you trade for him that he has potential but isnt' there yet. Only way I would be in favor of it is if you didn't decrease anyone and increased people very modestly, because the main point of midseason rating increases is to reward people trying to rebuild.....which I don't agree with. |
|
|
|
Post by Detroit Pistons on Jan 13, 2010 1:59:30 GMT 2
In my opinion it wouldn't be very realistic to do daily updates on player, as players have good days and bad days, so player might be 60 on one day and 90 the other day. But I do think doing one during the season is quite important. That's because when the ratings were done before the season, we didn't know how well each player will play. Like take Gallinari for an example, he was thought as a bust even before the season and he had only 68 rating and even that was back then doubtful, but he proved himself and have had a great year, so him being rated that low isn't right imo. Now as the half of the season has passed by we have much better view how good the players really are, especially compared to October. Chicago, well to be fair, that's a good sign of a GM, when you just don't do the trades to win tomorrow, but look more to the future. When I do trades, I usually don't even look at the ratings, I look at player talents, how good they could become, if they are declining etc. It's quite shortsighted, when you just care for the ratings. Yeah exactly, some days Kobe is an 80 (maybe) and some days he is a 99. The human element can't be simulated, so we have to go by a rating system. What you are suggesting would be like playing Monopoly, then half way through taking a monopoly from one person and giving it to the other. In my opinion we ought know what is going for the whole year then switch it in the off season, you used Gali as an example...what is the harm in waiting half a season? You know when you trade for him that he has potential but isnt' there yet. Only way I would be in favor of it is if you didn't decrease anyone and increased people very modestly, because the main point of midseason rating increases is to reward people trying to rebuild.....which I don't agree with. From a selfish point of view, I would very much like my players to perform as well as they are in real life. Kevin Love is an automatic double-double now and also with Ellis pretty much an automatic 20+PPG (with 30+ some days and 10+some days, it evens out in the end). But lets be logical, players progress all throughout the season. These ratings were based on the end of last season which is nowhere near to keeping it as real and as close to the actual performance in real life. I completely understand the disruption with the abrupt changes, but this is a SIM league. We want to keep things as real as possible. That's precisely why GMs even trade for veterans for young players. Its because they want to see progression for their "younglings" Even though players get better slowly, making changes after half a season(slowly multiplied by 40games is a lot by the way) is fair because it only keeps things real and players here are performing to the standards of their real life performance. |
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Jan 13, 2010 4:47:29 GMT 2
This is incredibly rare, but Minny, you stole the words right out of my mouth. Really, people don't usually say thing quite the way I want to say them, but you nailed it on the head. Your words below, especially, are exactly what I was thinking when reading this thread.
But I do think doing one during the season is quite important. That's because when the ratings were done before the season, we didn't know how well each player will play. Like take Gallinari for an example, he was thought as a bust even before the season and he had only 68 rating and even that was back then doubtful, but he proved himself and have had a great year, so him being rated that low isn't right imo. Now as the half of the season has passed by we have much better view how good the players really are, especially compared to October.
Chicago, well to be fair, that's a sign of a good GM, when you just don't do the trades to win tomorrow, but look more to the future. When I do trades, I usually don't even look at the ratings, I look at player talents, how good they could become, if they are declining etc. It's quite shortsighted, when you just care for the ratings.
So yea, I always only look at real life, almost exclusively anyway. Certain situations if my team is winning in this league I might knowingly sacrifice future ratings for a chance at a title this year, but almost always I don't really care about a players current rating, and only look at how good they are IRL and how good I think they can be.
And, think of this mid-season ratings change less as - players got better during the season so far - and more as - we were wrong about this guy before the season, and it's just not fair to his owner to be this wrong the entire season.
|
|
|
|
Post by New Orleans Hornets on Jan 13, 2010 6:41:41 GMT 2
In most every league I've played in everyone puts way too much emphasis on players ratings. It's junk. Leave the rating the way they are until after the all star break then make any changes that u see fit. I have never liked the way the leagues make ratings out to be some sort of big deal. It's crazy, especially when it comes to trades. Trading a 77 for 2 73 rated players or an 88 for 2 80+ rated players. I think a few owners here saw me draft Courtney Lee (drafted 22 overall and rated 68) in Legends and he had a 16.1 scoring avg this last season. IMO the rating system is WAY overrated and too much emphasis is put on them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte Bobcats on Jan 13, 2010 7:58:32 GMT 2
Well ratings shouldn't be the first priority in trading but they do have a part to play. However like what Minny said, the most important thing is the GM's judgment. And if anything, the midseason ratings update will reward GMs with good judgment and somehow 'punish' (for lack of a better word) the GMs that say, for example traded Bogut for Ben Wallace.
p.s. to LAC. I think it would, if you were to update his shotblocking, stealing or rebounding:)
p.p.s. And please no personal attacks eg name calling whatsoever. It only destroys the relationship between GMs and nothing is satisfied but one's ego
|
|
|
|
Post by blue on Jan 13, 2010 8:34:27 GMT 2
Well you don't have to tell me, when I do trades it's what the person is doing in real life more then their rating is. When I did the Noah for Lee trade I was hesitant to trade Noah because of the great year he has been having, but Lee has been having an even better year so I had to pull the trigger on that one. In the end though I guess you guys are right, if the example that I explained earlier did happen, then I guess it's their fault since they never looked ahead to the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte Bobcats on Jan 13, 2010 18:38:18 GMT 2
(Y) Thumbs up buddy
|
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Timberwolves on Jan 18, 2010 1:20:01 GMT 2
No votes during the past days, so it's safe to say that we'll do this, now the only question is when. As New Orleans suggested, around All-Star break would be great. So, in my opinion we should do it from Feb 8 to Feb 15, during that span of those 8 days, there are 26 games, which probably won't change anything and so we would do 3-4 teams per day. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by New York Knicks on Jan 18, 2010 1:23:28 GMT 2
sounds good to me
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Jan 18, 2010 1:25:47 GMT 2
I'm cool with it.
|
|
