|
Post by New Jersey Nets on Jul 14, 2010 23:22:56 GMT
Well, everyone always posts about increases... no one ever volunteers for decreases Here is just a list I came up with. I tried to be fair and balanced, but I'm sure it will spark a lot of debate. 79 M Dunleavy (76) 76 B Jackson (72) 87 Y Ming (83) 78 A McDyess (75) 75 D Brown (70) 79 M Okur (77) 74 J Tinsley (72) 79 T Chandler (75) 85 R Jefferson (81) 77 B Miller (74) 81 R Hamilton (79) 75 Z Ilgauskas (72) 80 B Gordon (78) 87 R Allen (81) 88 B Davis (82) 77 Y Jianlian (73) 84 E Okafor (77) 91 G Arenas (86) 88 R Artest (81) 80 J Calderon (76) 82 S Oneal (75) 81 M Bibby (78) 80 K Hinrich (77) 82 G Oden (75) 85 S Marion (78) 76 C Wilcox (74) 74 B Wright (70) 81 E Brand (76) 80 J O'Neal (76) 85 Josh Howard (80) 87 T McGrady (80) 82 M Beasley (78) 85 M Redd (82) 82 A Iverson (77) 89 V Carter (86) 75 S Marbury (72) 81 P Stojakovic (76) 97 K Garnett (83) 91 T Duncan (86) 87 M Ginobli (85) 78 S Battier (74) 81 R Wallace (75)
|
|
|
Post by Memphis Grizzlies on Jul 14, 2010 23:38:13 GMT
I think it is a very good list.
I say the Garnett decrease is right on.
I disagree about Yao, Oden and Calderon, they are all in the same position of being injured. Yao is still a dominant player when healthy so I say 86-85. Oden is forever injured but still has a ton of potential so I wouldn't drop him so much, about 79-80. Same thing with Jose, when healthy he put up 13 and 9 but he has been playing banged up the last few years, so I give him a 78.
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Timberwolves on Jul 15, 2010 1:17:56 GMT
I agree with the list....I cant think about any other player so I think that those ratings are fine
|
|
|
Post by Utah Jazz on Jul 15, 2010 2:59:39 GMT
I can't argue that Elton Brand had a good year this past season but he has already had his rating dropped 10 points on 2 seperate occassions this season alone.
In hindsight his agent did a great job negotiating his contract. At the rate its going Brand will be rated 70 and making over $20 mil a season.
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Jul 15, 2010 6:05:27 GMT
Good list New Jersey! Player rating decreases has been on my mind for some time too, I'll try and address all of these.
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Jul 15, 2010 21:54:48 GMT
didnt Bobby Jackson retire a long time ago? dont be too strict to the injured players: Yao (will be a dominant C again > 87 > 85) Arenes (just 27 years and a headcase but an awesome player > 91 > 89) Oden (give him a chance > 82 > 78) and dont forget if a star player plays in a great team, we shouldn't drop his ratings too much... Marion (85 > 82) Artest (88 > 85) Ray Allen (87 > 84) imo Carter & Redd & Tmac are really weak and old now...Marbury too...btw what happens to the retired players (Sheed, Marbury,Iverson,...)
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Jul 15, 2010 21:57:51 GMT
Retired players like Marbury and Iverson, we either wait until their contract expires and then they leave the league, or we just cut them off instantly if it's obvious they wont be making a comeback.
|
|
|
Post by Memphis Grizzlies on Jul 15, 2010 21:59:53 GMT
Iverson says he wants to play next year.
|
|
|
Post by Indiana Pacers on Jul 15, 2010 22:18:59 GMT
Bobby Jackson retired on October 24, 2009
|
|
|
Post by Indiana Pacers on Jul 15, 2010 22:29:07 GMT
I think 74 C Hasheem Thabeet maybe should get decreased.. maybe to 70
|
|
|
Post by Portland Trailblazers on Jul 15, 2010 22:30:11 GMT
I think 74 C Hasheem Thabeet maybe should get decreased.. maybe to 70 Did someone just see the rating in the trade? lol
|
|
|
Post by Washington Wizards on Jul 15, 2010 23:00:27 GMT
Why would you decrease a young guy (rookie) with tons of potential whose numbers increased with additional playing time towards the end of the season?
|
|
|
Post by Memphis Grizzlies on Jul 15, 2010 23:12:14 GMT
Dude, a raccoon's numbers would increase with more playing time, that isn't really an argument. There is alot of potential there for him to be a defensive specialist but I also think 74 might be a little too high.
|
|
|
Post by New Jersey Nets on Jul 15, 2010 23:21:35 GMT
didnt Bobby Jackson retire a long time ago? dont be too strict to the injured players: Yao (will be a dominant C again > 87 > 85) Arenes (just 27 years and a headcase but an awesome player > 91 > 89) Oden (give him a chance > 82 > 78) and dont forget if a star player plays in a great team, we shouldn't drop his ratings too much... Marion (85 > 82) Artest (88 > 85) Ray Allen (87 > 84) imo Carter & Redd & Tmac are really weak and old now...Marbury too...btw what happens to the retired players (Sheed, Marbury,Iverson,...) i think it is very clear that marion, artest, and allen are all not what they used to be shawn marion was not on a star team.. his numbers have been terrible the past few years on bad teams (miami and toronto). he definately deserves the decrease ron artest has basically lost all offensive ability except shooting threes... his numbers were down even before he went to LAL
|
|
|
Post by Washington Wizards on Jul 15, 2010 23:21:37 GMT
By that rationale, Blake Griffin should decrease as well. His numbers really sucked this year. Never mind he didn't play any minutes. Remember, a racoon's numbers will increase with more playing time.
Thabeet had many games where he played 5 minutes. Hard to put up any numbers playing 5 minutes, regardless of how good you are. In the last month of the season, he ended up getting little more consistent minutes and his stats were pretty decent.
I'm obviously kidding about Blake but what about a guy like Gerald Henderson? He didn't play much but still has very good potential and should show statistical improvement this year as he gets more consistent minutes. Should he be decreased as well? I don't think so.
Some rookies get playing time and some don't. Most rookies ratings are based on potential anyway. One year isn't enough time to see what most rookies are going to do IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Memphis Grizzlies on Jul 15, 2010 23:27:06 GMT
It is obviously different if you don't play a single minute. In April Thabeet averaged 21.9 MPG 4.1PPG 5.8RPG 1.6BPG 22 mins are those of a solid backup/role player and his stats are average at best.
|
|
|
Post by Memphis Grizzlies on Jul 15, 2010 23:36:22 GMT
As for GH he is an even worse case than Thabeet. He averaged 8.3MPG for the whole season. In April (only 2 games so its not very consistent) he put up 19.5 MPG 9.0 PPG and 4.5 RPG much better than Thabeet. Also if it is decided that GH should be decreased I would be fine with that, ratings should not be based on potential, potential should taken into account but it shouldn't be the basis for anyone's rating and you are right that GH didn't exactly play well.
|
|
|
Post by Washington Wizards on Jul 15, 2010 23:43:15 GMT
For the entire seasoon, Tyson Chandler averaged 6.5 points, 6.3 boards and 1.1 blocks in 22.8 minutes per game. What is Chandler rated?
|
|
|
Post by Memphis Grizzlies on Jul 15, 2010 23:45:29 GMT
Tyson Chandler is on this list.
|
|
|
Post by Washington Wizards on Jul 16, 2010 0:17:43 GMT
Tyson Chandler is on the list to be moved from a 79 to a 75. Thabeet is only at a 74 now.
Also, with a rookie, other than potential, what else can you base their ratings on?
John Wall will clearly be rated as a upper 70's guy based on his potential. Blake Griffin is a 78 (I think) based on potential. Gerald Henderson should keep his rating IMO, based on potential.
|
|
|
Post by Memphis Grizzlies on Jul 16, 2010 0:44:56 GMT
I say John Wall should be mid to low 80's (Griffin is an 82). I also wouldn't necessarily call Griffin and Wall's ratings potential based. They have dominated on all levels of basketball and show no signs of slowing down. Thabeet on the other hand is not and was never dominant, I think the best example of a potential based rating in this draft is Daniel Orton. Rookies are the exception to my thoughts about not using potential because obviously they haven't done anything in the NBA and since Thabeet has played a year ratings should be based on that while taking potential into account and not the other way around. Of course the farther into the league they are the less potential matters (Greg Oden is quickly running out of potential cards in his pocket).
|
|
|
Post by Washington Wizards on Jul 16, 2010 1:36:03 GMT
Well, I think we have covered the subject enough for the night. Even though we are coming at this from 2 different view points, I have enjoyed the educated discussion and respect your opinion. Have a great night.
|
|
|
Post by Memphis Grizzlies on Jul 16, 2010 2:10:44 GMT
Well I feel the same way and hopefully everyone else can get involved and it can be like this for the whole list and not just Thabeet.
|
|
|
Post by New Jersey Nets on Jul 16, 2010 2:16:09 GMT
I think as far as rookies go, there seems to be a pattern year after year... 1 or 2 are rated in the low 80s, a couple 75+, and then the mass majority of rookies are all between 68 and 73
|
|
|
Post by Indiana Pacers on Jul 16, 2010 3:50:42 GMT
I'm sorry but Hasheem Thabeet was picked what oh right 2nd overall and got send down to the D-league I'm pretty sure no other rookie in the lottery gets send down to the D-league yeah its only year one but I just think that a 70 would do him good right now
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Jul 19, 2010 12:10:37 GMT
I agree that Hasheem should be roughly a 70. It doesn't matter if he's being run as a major or minor part of the Memphis system or not, he hasn't contributed anything special in the time he's been on the floor.
Blake Griffin hasn't even played a minute yet, and when a rookie enters the league there's really not much of an option except to base a large part of his rating on potential. Hasheem hasn't lived up to any semblance of his potential, so he should have a review of his rating.
|
|
|
Post by Dallas Mavericks on Jul 20, 2010 3:22:18 GMT
I am good with all the decreases except Duncan and Allen, if Ray's decrease has to happen make him a 84.
Other then that here's my case for why Duncan should stay at 91
8th in the league in RPG, 6th in RP48 (48 minutes) 16th in BPG, 18th in BLK48 minutes, 6th in BLK/PF 30th in PPG (out of all position players), Scoring per 48 minutes (27.5 PPG), 16th in the NBA 17th in FG percentage (.518) 12th in double doubles
All of these among all position players, not just PF/C.
I could get more stats but that would take forever (got em from our friends in ESPN)
|
|
|
Post by Orlando Magic on Jul 20, 2010 3:38:19 GMT
I think all of those are good, I just think Manu should stay where he is or improve a little. He only got better last season.
|
|
|
Post by Memphis Grizzlies on Jul 20, 2010 3:46:21 GMT
Manu didn't get better, he was coming off an injury year so it might have seemed that way and he is becoming more inconsistent than in past years.
|
|
|
Post by Orlando Magic on Jul 20, 2010 3:52:05 GMT
He just seemed so much more consistent and productive last year then usual. I don't watch many spurs games but I did monitor his games as I had him in my main fantasy basketball league. Maybe it was cause he was the leader when parker and duncan were constantly hurt.
|
|