Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:55 pm
Andrew, fantastic rosters mate! I've been using them since 06, and they're always top notch. Like most people though, I have a few suggestions. Unlike most people. mine are kind of reasonable:
- Anthony Parker needs to be better. I know you don't like to change ratings based on a player "needing to be better", but he's been starting all year at SG over Fred Jones (71 in your roster, could be 69 I think, but 71 is fine) for the 22-23 division-leading Raps (shocking, I know, but awesome!), and putting up 11.7 PPG on .461 FG% and .446 3PT%, so at least his 3PT, Off. Awarenes, Def. Awarness (subjective, yeah, but in watching the Raps all year,I think he's a decent defender, not great, but good, and smart on d) and Strength ratings could be boosted
- I know your rosters are intended to give as much realism as possible, but I'm wondering if you've ever contemplated assigning positions on the basis of what makes the most sense for that team, considering CPU substitution and line-up tendencies? For instance, Atlanta has Shelden Williams as 3rd Center, when it would make much more sense to label him a PF, since looking through their lineup, the computer is likely to play Slava Medvedenko as Marvin Williams' primary backup, while leaving Shelden on the bench, who is rated above Medvenko in almost every category, and certainly those that matter most for big men. Or in Boston, Ryan Gomes should totally be the backup PF. I know they play him at SF alot, but in game, it just doesn't make sense based on his ratings and the Celtics lineup. I'm not suggesting an outright upheaval of teams rotations, such as assigning Brent Barry as SF/SG, which actually makes his overall higher than Bowen's, and therefor the computer would start him at SF. Such a move I would certainly oppose. But suppose a team has only 2 PG's, but 5 SG's, 2 of whom are combo guards and fairly adept at manning the point, and both of those combo guards are vastly superior to the team's 2nd tier PG, who happens to be an exceptionally poor player in game (think Kevin Ollie). Why not make one of those hypothetical combo guards into a PG, threby improving the team's PG depth, and freeing up minutes at SG for other talented players?
Basically, I don't think that a coach's current or most common rotation should necissarily define a players' position in game. Some coaches make bad lineup decision, or at least decisions that don't translate well to the game. I do not think that a team's five best players should necissarily always start for every team, but I do think some consideration should be given to how the computer treats each position, and each player relative to each psotion and the team's roster/rotation. As a final example, Flip Murray is not suited to play the point in this game. I know Detroit started him there when Chauncey was out, but his passing is too atrocious in this roster (which I agree with, he is anytihng but a pass-first PG) for him to play PG, especially since the Pistons have Lindsay Hunter ahead of him at point and a gaping hole being filled by Ronald Dupree at backup SG. Such a move does not greatly impact Detroit's team strategy, it merely maximizes the potential of their roster. And certainly, not all C's can be made into PF's, not all SF's into SG's, etc. I hope that made sense...
- Anthony Parker needs to be better. I know you don't like to change ratings based on a player "needing to be better", but he's been starting all year at SG over Fred Jones (71 in your roster, could be 69 I think, but 71 is fine) for the 22-23 division-leading Raps (shocking, I know, but awesome!), and putting up 11.7 PPG on .461 FG% and .446 3PT%, so at least his 3PT, Off. Awarenes, Def. Awarness (subjective, yeah, but in watching the Raps all year,I think he's a decent defender, not great, but good, and smart on d) and Strength ratings could be boosted
- I know your rosters are intended to give as much realism as possible, but I'm wondering if you've ever contemplated assigning positions on the basis of what makes the most sense for that team, considering CPU substitution and line-up tendencies? For instance, Atlanta has Shelden Williams as 3rd Center, when it would make much more sense to label him a PF, since looking through their lineup, the computer is likely to play Slava Medvedenko as Marvin Williams' primary backup, while leaving Shelden on the bench, who is rated above Medvenko in almost every category, and certainly those that matter most for big men. Or in Boston, Ryan Gomes should totally be the backup PF. I know they play him at SF alot, but in game, it just doesn't make sense based on his ratings and the Celtics lineup. I'm not suggesting an outright upheaval of teams rotations, such as assigning Brent Barry as SF/SG, which actually makes his overall higher than Bowen's, and therefor the computer would start him at SF. Such a move I would certainly oppose. But suppose a team has only 2 PG's, but 5 SG's, 2 of whom are combo guards and fairly adept at manning the point, and both of those combo guards are vastly superior to the team's 2nd tier PG, who happens to be an exceptionally poor player in game (think Kevin Ollie). Why not make one of those hypothetical combo guards into a PG, threby improving the team's PG depth, and freeing up minutes at SG for other talented players?
Basically, I don't think that a coach's current or most common rotation should necissarily define a players' position in game. Some coaches make bad lineup decision, or at least decisions that don't translate well to the game. I do not think that a team's five best players should necissarily always start for every team, but I do think some consideration should be given to how the computer treats each position, and each player relative to each psotion and the team's roster/rotation. As a final example, Flip Murray is not suited to play the point in this game. I know Detroit started him there when Chauncey was out, but his passing is too atrocious in this roster (which I agree with, he is anytihng but a pass-first PG) for him to play PG, especially since the Pistons have Lindsay Hunter ahead of him at point and a gaping hole being filled by Ronald Dupree at backup SG. Such a move does not greatly impact Detroit's team strategy, it merely maximizes the potential of their roster. And certainly, not all C's can be made into PF's, not all SF's into SG's, etc. I hope that made sense...
Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:37 am
Andrew, I have a few suggestions for the cavaliers, and a few musts, some may have already been said, but if not here:
1.) Daniel Gibson is now starting over ERIC SNOW.
2.) Increase Gibson's rating near the following areas, probably SLIGHTLY LOWER
:
Field Goals - 74
3 Pointers - 77
Free Throws - 71
Dunking - 78 (He CAN dunk, I've seen him do it)
Inside Scoring - 60
Off. Rebounds - 12
Jumping - 72
Strength 49
Quickness - 75
Speed - 74
Passing - 73
Dribbling - 71
Off. Awareness - 70
Def. Rebounds - 22
Stealing - 19
Blocking - 2
Def. Awareness - 70
Stamina - 69
Hardiness - 40
Clutch - 24
TOTAL RATING - 70
Not too high in my belief, he is a rookie, but he has played consistant solid ball, his first career start resulted in 18 points on several moves, including a dunk, layups, threes, shots.
3.) Add Daniel Gibson to have a basic dunk package (he can dunk, even though he is 6'2")
4.) Larry hughes headband, larry hughes left arm sleeve (white at home, and black on the road?)
5.) Sasha Pavlovic should get slightly increased ratings in all areas (no big deal, he just had 26 points and some amazing offensive moves in place of LeBron last night.
6.) Dan Gibson wears a team headband as well
Just the minors at 4 and 5, and the one major thing I think is Daniel Gibson starting instead of Eric Snow, you can even decrease Snow's rating to -4, but Dan Gibson is an excellent shooter as of since he first played, especially from 3 point land.
Thanks, also, when will the new version be released ?
1.) Daniel Gibson is now starting over ERIC SNOW.
2.) Increase Gibson's rating near the following areas, probably SLIGHTLY LOWER
:
Field Goals - 74
3 Pointers - 77
Free Throws - 71
Dunking - 78 (He CAN dunk, I've seen him do it)
Inside Scoring - 60
Off. Rebounds - 12
Jumping - 72
Strength 49
Quickness - 75
Speed - 74
Passing - 73
Dribbling - 71
Off. Awareness - 70
Def. Rebounds - 22
Stealing - 19
Blocking - 2
Def. Awareness - 70
Stamina - 69
Hardiness - 40
Clutch - 24
TOTAL RATING - 70
Not too high in my belief, he is a rookie, but he has played consistant solid ball, his first career start resulted in 18 points on several moves, including a dunk, layups, threes, shots.
3.) Add Daniel Gibson to have a basic dunk package (he can dunk, even though he is 6'2")
4.) Larry hughes headband, larry hughes left arm sleeve (white at home, and black on the road?)
5.) Sasha Pavlovic should get slightly increased ratings in all areas (no big deal, he just had 26 points and some amazing offensive moves in place of LeBron last night.
6.) Dan Gibson wears a team headband as well
Just the minors at 4 and 5, and the one major thing I think is Daniel Gibson starting instead of Eric Snow, you can even decrease Snow's rating to -4, but Dan Gibson is an excellent shooter as of since he first played, especially from 3 point land.
Thanks, also, when will the new version be released ?
Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:04 am
Thanks for the latest suggestions, I'll try to put them to good use. To answer your question cheater1034, I'm hoping to have a new version out sometime this Sunday. You can always check the latest slated release date in the stickied thread in the Support Forum.
Absolutely, and in some cases I've tired to do that. I usually switch a few players back and forth throughout the season as their role changes or they see time in the starting lineup.
TheMC5 wrote:I know your rosters are intended to give as much realism as possible, but I'm wondering if you've ever contemplated assigning positions on the basis of what makes the most sense for that team, considering CPU substitution and line-up tendencies?
Absolutely, and in some cases I've tired to do that. I usually switch a few players back and forth throughout the season as their role changes or they see time in the starting lineup.