|
1)Which Four Cities sound fun? -Newark, New Jersey. The greater NYC area could really use a professional basketball team. -Vancouver, BC. From what I've read, there's still a decent feeling around old hands in the real NBA that Vancouver was really poor timing (in the 90's, Canada was viewed as much more remote than it is today) and that there's actually a decent sentiment to give it another shot during the next wave of expansion. -Anchorage, Alaska. This is your penance for calling them out. -Honolulu, HI. Mostly because I'm wondering how the game will model it. Do you get hosed over by the fact that your players are jet-lagged to hell for every road game? Do you have to deal with players refusing to go so far away? 2)Which Season do we start in? 2020-2021; might as well start fresh in the new timeline.
|
#
¿
May 11, 2020 12:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 10:50 |
|
|
1)What should we call the Honolulu team? Volcanoes is perfect. Matches with the city, cool sound, very unique, plenty of pun-related options (including some like "exploding for 40 points" which are already in the NBA lingo!). Make your primary color red and a secondary of ash gray. Or vice versa, whichever would look cooler. 2)Do we go with Vancouver Grind or something else? If something else, what? Meh. Singular nicknames are always awkward because it makes it so weird to refer to the teams and players. Honestly I think Ravens would be better; not fantastic, but fine. Side note, Memphis refusing to change their name even after Vancouver comes back is probably accurate. The primary reason Charlotte got back the "Hornets" name is because there was a lot of people who still had fond memories of the 90's Charlotte Hornets, their awesome color scheme, the logo, etc; the original Grizzlies don't seem to have nearly that kind of nostalgia or love. 3)Which do we play as? Honolulu. Just seems to be more of a unique setting than Vancouver..
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2020 13:34
|
|
|
Jumping on the Ravens/Honu, play as Honu 
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2020 21:42
|
|
|
1.) B, though with us getting the 9th or 10th best player from each team, I'm guessing you'll have to really stretch the definition of 'potential' to include dudes like "Marquise Chriss is a former lottery pick who's only 22; four teams have already given up on him as a lost cause, but technically he could still figure it out..." Let's also toss in A as a backup plan. 2.) B. Go potential all the way. The team is going to be miles from competitive, so upside is more important than the player's current ability to play. 3.) C, with A slightly considered. Focus primarily on potential, but make sure you don't overload too much on one position so that one of our draftees can't get minutes.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2020 12:42
|
|
|
I would like to know if there's any rookies we passed on that are really crushing it. Wouldn't be an NBA franchise if there weren't jerk message board fans (hey that's us!) ripping our stupid GM for failing to properly project a guy.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2020 20:58
|
|
|
Namtab posted:Lets begin with why you hate both(?) of the new york teams.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2020 01:04
|
|
|
1. Sign Monte Morris. The team could use a backup point guard more than anything else; Morris seems solid enough to be useful but not so good as to threaten to take minutes from VanVleet or potential future draft picks. If that fails, then I guess go for Mitchell or Schroeder (if the numbers work). Sign someone else who fits, but I'd stay away from SF because as you noted, we've potentially got lots of money coming down the pipe next year in re-upping our guys. Also, since the team isn't in win-now mode, don't feel the need to sign three guys for all our money just because it's there; cap space and roster spots can themselves be useful assets to a team like the Honu that aren't in immediate win-now mode. 2. Take the Clippers deal. There's enough draft picks on the team now and in the future that one really good player is worth more than two guys who might top out as 'decent'. How does NBA2K model protected picks that don't get triggered? In the real NBA, there's all sorts of ways protected picks can be handled if they don't convey - they can immediately turn into a second round pick, they can roll over with similar-but-lesser protections for a year or more*, or it can be a use-it-or-lose-it where it either conveys or you get nothing. The most common method seems to be something along the lines of "lottery protected in 2020, top 10 protected in 2021, otherwise becomes two second round picks in 2022 and 2023". Would love to think the NBA2K includes this complexity, but given the quirkiness of other things, I'm skeptical. *The most absurd one I remember is in mid-2011, Cleveland got a protected pick from Sacramento that had the following protections: First round pick protected for picks 1-14 in 2012, 1-13 in 2013, 1-12 in 2014 and 1-10 in 2015, 2016 and 2017. If the pick was not conveyed during 2017, it instantly became a 2017 second round selection, completing the transaction. Yes, six full years of protections, so long that the protections lasted longer than the NBA career of the player acquired (JJ Hickson). Of course, Sacramento being Sacramento, their eternal crappiness ensured the pick was locked up tighter than the Pentagon and they never even came close to actually losing it.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2020 15:57
|
|
|
Continue as is. As you said, this is a thing that actually happens in real life, players betting on themselves. So long as you don't intentionally abuse this, it seems like a fair way to handle it. Hell, depending on how things play out, we very well might see this scenario in real life this offseason due to corona. If there's a huge salary cap decrease, some rookies might turn down long-term offers and instead just take the qualifying offer so that they can get actual market value next offseason after the cap rebounds rather than signing for a sub-market deal based on the corona-depressed cap numbers. Also, you should be tracking the "what the gently caress NBA2K, I thought you called yourself a realistic simulator" moments. We're already at...what...4? Nobody signs second round picks, draft pick protections only last a year, all trade exceptions expiring before free agency, and RFA weird as poo poo. Any more that I'm missing?
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2020 04:10
|
|
|
oldskool posted:
 I don't think you should manually override the rules just to make it go nuts, but you're one owner out of 32, so if there's a strong majority for some bullshit rule, I think you don't use Magic Player Powers to override it. Also, I'm fine with modifying the goaltending rules. Maybe not all the way to "eliminate goaltending" because then you'd just have a 7'3" guy standing next to the basket at all time to jump and block shots at the rim, but the FIBA rules of "once it hits the rim, it's fair game even if it looks like it could still bounce in" produces more exciting moments than the NBA/NCAA's invisible cylinder that tends to cut down on putbacks and athletic high-jumping rebounds.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2020 00:19
|
|
let the game do at least one ridiculously stupid broken thing
|
Guper posted:Extend Holiday for 4 years
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2020 17:42
|
|
|
ReWinter posted:Get Floyd. No question about that one. For #2, I think it might be a good idea to grab some cheap vets and try to get some of the more promising young players in mentor setups. My understanding is that badges do indeed make a difference in simmed games so we shouldn't neglect that area.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2020 18:43
|
|
|
Veryslightlymad posted:Remember when I was talking about the Cap being broken? I thumb through the salary cap table for next season, and I notice that quite a lot of teams are going to have actual space to work with, and I check the coming Free Agent class and I see that it's..... really good. Like, at least two pages of high quality (like 84+) players. So, while everyone is crazily capped out this season, I might have overreacted. It's entirely possible that teams made a bunch of moves to get themselves ready for what promises to be a wild-west shootout of an off-season. I'm going to tentatively withdraw that particular criticism. We'll see if that "entire roster of temps" thing persists, because it'd be sad to be the only relatively stable team in the league. That said, real world that wouldn't apply to Vancouver. The city is supposedly pretty cool, but it's not super huge (2.5 million people in the MSA, same level as Charlotte and Orlando), they don't really have any tradition or cachet among players, it's a cold-weather city, and being in Canada rather than the US probably would negatively affect endorsement opportunities. Though there's rumors that if expansion happens, Vancouver would be firmly on the table, so who knows, maybe in a decade or so, we'll be able to see how it plays out for real.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2020 17:20
|
|
|
Plan E, let's go. Also, what does our future draft picks stash look like? We still have any primo ones coming up from other teams or are we basically set in our picks and just rolling with our own (presumably non-lottery) picks?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2020 21:47
|
|
|
Dang, what a ride. A balanced team can really pay off, I guess and the actual events of the playoffs all seem fairly reasonable.  Except for the end. The idea that 25 teams would be in favor of abolishing the salary cap is ludicrous. In the real world, there'd be maybe five teams that would vote yes on that - even most big market teams wouldn't be eager to open Pandora's box to have their salary costs go absolutely insane. Even if you wanted to say that maybe a couple teams get caught up in the euphoria of "we made a deep playoff run and are only one piece away!" so they vote against their fiscal interests, I don't see how that proposal even gets to double-digit votes, much less the two-thirds majority needed to pass.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2020 13:42
|
|
|
Really hoping this survives in some fashion, whether here on SA or on the new Beach that people are talking about on the Discord. As for actual in-game stuff, I'm pretty sure that after a year like this, 20-some teams would immediately revolt and lock out the players to re-institute the salary cap. Namewise, let's fire up an online name generator for alliterative names, presented without comment: Andrei Anthony Larry Lawrence Gordon Getty Max Miller Pedro Penderson Randy Reginald Edward Evans Klaus Kennedy Hansen Helios Vito Vittorio
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2020 16:17
|
|
|
Looking at those first few images, I'm wondering: Does NBA2K simulate individual owners/include anything about team sales? Because ye gods, in a world where teams are firmly in the $200+ mil salary range, no salary cap, and a luxury tax that's half a loving billion dollars per team, there'd be a grand stampede of owners trying to bail out. Nice to see Thibs is back coaching in the league for the Ravens under a pseudonym. Playing three guys 48 minutes a night on some random regular season game that was over at halftime, good to see nothing's changed buddy. MagusofStars fucked around with this message at 16:39 on Jun 26, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2020 16:36
|
|
|
So based on this, they started the year 0-25, finally got a win over a team that should quit the NBA in shame, then another 8 in a row. Would love for you to keep tracking this and let us know just how bad their losing streaks are. The first post-LeBron Cavs had a stretch where they went on a 1-36 run...and this might be more awful than that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2020 19:18
|
|
|
Veryslightlymad posted:For real, now, that this is a debate among sports fans/and actual sports teams, especially in the NBA which has a lottery? STUPID. Don't. Tank. Since the top four picks are selected by lottery, the worst team in the league has the highest odds of landing the number five pick. They have a little less than 48% chance to land #5. Tanking is loving stupid. You're much, much better off trying to develop your actual talent and letting the chips fall where they may. Consider that only about a third (a fourth? less?) of the time, the best player in the draft actually winds up being the #1 overall pick (at a rate roughly equal to the amount of #1 picks that wound up being complete busts, mind you), tanking even a losing season for a higher pick is insanity. Also worth noting that for all the hoopla about tanking, the Process-Era 76'ers tore down a conference semifinals team in order to load up on draft picks and develop a powerhouse team that (checks)...uh, has lost in the conference semi-finals. The only team who's successfully rode multiple high lottery picks to a title is 2016 Cleveland and without LeBron's return, that team is Kyrie/Thompson/Waiters/Wiggins and probably tops out as a second round playoff exit. You're right about tanking being dumb, but the whole media discussion about it tends to be very ill-informed.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2020 21:12
|
|
|
Thordain posted:Yeah, that threw me for a loop too. That might be the worst NBA draft day trade I've ever seen,speaking purely in terms of value. Like the Hawks sending Luka to Dallas is worse but we couldn't have known that yet(We knew). The Kings gave up a second round pick to move down 11 spots in the same draft. If you really believed that the player at #17 was a top-tier draft pick, you should have taken him at 6 or traded down in a normal way. If you don't want Stacey Byers on your team, then why the heck did you take him at 6 overall? Either way, it's egregious to the point that a GM would likely get fired on the spot for it. The only real-life scenario I can even remotely envision is Stacey Byers calling up the GM and completely refusing to play for Sacramento, so much so that the Kings are willing to take any offer just to get rid of him...and even then, I'm not sure why you'd need to toss in a second rounder as a sweetener.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
Veryslightlymad posted:one guy does weird performance art where he'll try to lead the game in assists while not scoring or rebounding.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2020 20:49
|
|
|
1 and 2.) D I'm with oldskool on this, you need to get a Luka stopper because that's the biggest hole on your entire team right now. 3.) A, relocate them if they continue to suck. In real-life sports, I hate relocation because it's always either (1) the owner's fault for being so lovely that fans give up or (2) the owner being a greedy rear end in a top hat who just wants a new stadium and is moving because the local government isn't willing to hand out several hundred million dollars of taxpayer money. But this being a simulation, why not? Let's move the Kings out of their historical struggles in Sacramento and close the circle by moving them to Seattle. 4.) B, add two Since you have control, I'd be interested in seeing one in Anchorage, Alaska, as the most remote area on the list.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2020 18:04
|
|
|
Seattle Alberquerque El Paso Providence Also, in a world where Dick Steele is an option, you should already know how the vote is going to go here.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2020 23:21
|
|
|
Seattle - E. Can't explain why, but this just seems to be the cleanest for me. Montreal - C Voyageurs is a unique nickname and that logo is top-tier.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2020 14:25
|
|
|
B. Maybe the Ravens are just run by idiots; let them have their poo poo coach if they really want. A. Do that trade, bring back the fan favorite. The 10 to 15 range seems fair. He’s not worth the 20 he’s asking, but he’s good enough to be worth a bit of cash.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2020 23:41
|
|
|
JackBandit posted:I also am loving imagining the insanely dumb think pieces that would have come out if his team started well before everyone died. “They said you need depth to win in this league. Jared Henderson disagrees, and his aggressive rotations might just be the next moneyball revolution in basketball.” In a league where everybody analyzes every minute detail of the game, you can lose the big picture and miss the forest for the trees. The best innovations are simple and Jared Henderson has one that has stunned the league in racing to a 23-6 start to the season. It's all based on identifying a longtime NBA inefficiency, one so commonplace that no NBA watchers even realized it exists. Think of the third quarter of the last NBA game you watched, even among championship contending teams like Dallas, Honolulu, or the Knicks. Who was in the game at that time? You likely struggle to even remember who was on the floor; not future Hall of Famers like Luka Doncic or Bol Bol, it was likely a team of players who even an NBA diehard might struggle to recognize. This has been the pattern for decades in the NBA - in the 2010's LeBron would give up third-quarter minutes to Sasha Pavolovic, in the 1990's, Jordan would give up third-quarter minutes to Jason Caffey would play, in the 1970's, Kareem would give up third-quarter minutes to Bob Boozer. To the normal person, this is just an acceptable plan, but to Jared Henderson, the immediate question was: Why? Games are 48 minutes long, yet every single NBA team chooses to voluntarily give up ten or twenty of those precious minutes by playing inferior bench players and leaving their stars on the bench. Points scored with two minutes left in the third quarter count the exact same as points scored with two minutes left in the fourth quarter, but coaches treat the latter as far more important than the former. Nobody would even consider sitting a Doncic or Bol in the fourth quarter, yet nobody questions doing it in the third quarter. This is basketball's equivalent to football's long-time obsession with punting, a foolish tradition where you are voluntarily crippling your own team by not producing your best effort. Jared Henderson has changed this paradigm. By playing his best players all game and only his best players, the Ravens really take advantage of those times when other teams are punting on the third quarter. A quick check of the standings shows the results - the Ravens are scorching hot and far exceeding the modest expectations placed on them by gamblers and the media. But those expectations were set assuming the Ravens would play by normal NBA rules, having their Ravens second string would play opponent's second string and effectively ignoring a third of the game if not more. Under the new Henderson Rules, where the Ravens are allowed to brazenly pilfer an advantage over less competent coaches by playing their first string against others' second team? The Ravens might need to clear space on their trophy shelf, because the new paradigm is in Baltimore thanks to Jared Henderson's ahead of the curve strategies.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2020 22:36
|
|
|
FartingBedpost posted:And voting F, I like our squad and adding Giannis will give us two aging superstars to worry about.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2020 12:15
|
|
|
AAB.Largepotato posted:What does the Possession Arrow rule mean? Does some official pop up and shoot a player with a bow and arrow and that decides who has the ball? The NBA, WNBA, and Euro League usually don't use it, but basically every other level of basketball does - college basketball, high schools, other overseas leagues, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2020 12:36
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:Are they doing empty arenas? I can't remember which sport(s) are doing that, but I've heard it mentioned.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2020 21:45
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:I would have just called the season and maybe given the Bucks a special sticker for having the best record (and player, which helps) in the league, but if they insist on carrying on I suppose that this is the best way to do it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2020 22:24
|
|
|
How far over the cap are the Knicks? Is their bold strategy of not even signing veteran's minimum dudes helping or are they still miles above the limit?oldskool posted:more games played = more money made However, prior to the shutdown, most teams were somewhere in the 60's for total games played, so they were way off of meeting their local TV contracts. So effectively every single extra game they can squeeze out is money straight into the pockets of owners and players by helping to satisfy the local TV contracts. This is why they didn't just go straight to the playoffs - the eight games means those 22 teams either fully satisfy their local TV contracts or come quite close. BUT the flip side of this coin is that the Playoff TV contracts are separate payouts. So there's a balancing act - what's the absolute most teams we can put in the bubble to get as close to satisfying local TV contracts as we can without creating too much risk that Covid will go rampant and you lose the Playoff TV money?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2020 15:24
|
|
|
Thread Hero Bol Bol's first real life NBA game was so incredibly awesome that he got immediately drug tested afterwards: https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/nuggets-bol-bol-drug-tested-following-stellar-performance-in-nba-debut/
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2020 21:09
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:Would anyone else be keen to discuss the next (and final) two expansion teams? I am not saying that we/he should expand the league right now, or even soon, but I think that it would be a fun diversion. I assumed that the league had no size limit, but now that I know that it's a hard 36 I am kind of keen to think about the next round of expansion. Personally, I think that we should add two teams properly out West and move the T-wolves to the Eastern Conference. Minneapolis is basically dead north of New Orleans and both are west of the Mississippi, but NO is close to a number of other WC teams while Minnesota is not even remotely close to any WC teams but a number of EC ones. They also had an ABA team for a couple years in the mid-70's, though the most notable thing about the St. Louis ABA team is the  fact that the NBA agreed to hand them around 2% of the league's annual TV revenues in perpetuity (i.e., forever) to fold their franchise which was already on the verge of bankruptcy. It's generally estimated that the total value of the deal (including the price the NBA eventually paid to get out of it) was somewhere around $800 million dollars over 40 years for, worth repeating, folding a lovely failing franchise in a league that was about to collapse. It's widely considered to be the greatest deal in the history of US professional sports and one of the most incredible business deals ever made in any industry.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2020 22:15
|
|
|
Regarding the Clippers, I'm on board with moving them back to San Diego and returning their old looks. I mean, the NBA is horrible about making names match the cities (see: Utah Jazz), but Clippers makes a hell of a lot more sense in a naval city like San Diego anyways. And really, LA has never embraced the Clippers the way they do the Lakers (even now, when they're finally successful), so let's make them the pride of San Diego rather than "oh yeah, they also exist" like they are in LA. Regarding retirements and Hall of Fame: -Klay Thompson is making the real-life Hall of Fame. If he retired today, he might be a coin-flip, but if we give him 3-4 more years of performance, he's absolutely in. Not a first-ballot guy, but his numbers and impact compare favorably to a lot of guys who are already in, plus his three (or more?) championships. -Jersey retirements are far more about what the fans think of you than your actual performance and NBA2K clearly doesn't understand this. Since you mentioned Kawhi, if he doesn't win a title this year or next year and leaves, he probably wouldn't get his jersey retired by the Clips (especially if the departure was on bad terms). Hell, he was wildly successful in San Antonio and might have to wait a few years for a Spurs jersey retirement just because of the fan anger at the way he left. By comparison, a dude like Tristan Thompson isn't even remotely on Kawhi's level in terms of talent, but is getting his jersey retired by the Cavaliers ASAP once he retires because he's played 600+ games with the Cavs, was part of the 2016 title, and the fanbase loves him. Seriously, the NBA2K developers need to go to an NBA game sometime and look at the jerseys hanging in the rafters - of course there's the NBA legends like Jordan, Kareem, etc, but there's also dudes like Derek Harper where it's basically a lifetime achievement award for sticking with the same franchise long enough. -In the real world, not only would Delon Wright get his jersey retired by the Honu without hesitation, he would even get some token discussion for the Hall of Fame. He wouldn't actually get votes, but five titles and the per-36 numbers would definitely make him the subject of a couple think pieces like "Should glue guys like Delon Wright be in the Hall of Fame?" and "Does the Hall of Fame overvalue raw numbers and undervalue real impact? Delon Wright's case as a sixth man". MagusofStars fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Jul 29, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2020 14:35
|
|
|
Veryslightlymad posted:One of the four expansion teams made the NBA Finals. Take your bets here which one. Looking at the midseason standings, I'm guessing Montreal. They were firmly in the middle of the pack, but have a couple talented players and are a young team, so they're the kind of team that can get hot and break through.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2020 19:19
|
|
|
C, A. Veryslightlymad posted:We get a "Cleveland is historically bad" fact, and luckily don't win the lottery, because I'd have felt stupid if the Pacers got the #1 pick. As it stands, we did wind up giving them a fairly powerful back-to-back position. Meanwhile, Utah will probably draft the next true superstar, but not match him in free agency four years from now and let him walk to like, I don't know. I'm gonna guess Milwaukee. Whereas a franchise like Sacramento has been in the lottery for like 15 straight years and plenty of times before that too, yet somehow has only once nabbed the #1 pick, way back in 1989, selecting the legendary nickname/mediocre player "Never Nervous Pervis" Ellison. Guthix Curnir posted:To be fair, hiring a coach who has coached previously, regardless of their record/playstyle, instead of a long time assistant, or someone new that could be promising or at the very least different is something I can see American professional sports leagues easily doing. It won't be.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2020 16:37
|
|
|
Potential, with Bol getting up there, I think we're a little off from true title contention, so working on the next wave would be good. Wing, Big, Guard With the #3 pick, you should probably take positional fit into account, but afterwards, just take the very highly rated guy. Veryslightlymad posted:We do vault up to third though, on the backs of our Magic Pick. Three lottery picks in the most off-the-chain good draft class that this thread has seen. There's multiple guys out the box with over 80 OVR, there's at least 6 players my scouts think have all-star potential, and there's a guy that's got a ceiling of "Hakeem Olajuwon--All-NBA", (down from "Hakeem Olajuwon--Hall of Fame", but still Hakeem. I guess they worry he won't be as good for as long? Iunno. It's academic.) The Hakeem-like guy isn't even the consensus #1 pick (though, for some reason, one of the guys that is #1 on one of the boards is compared to Chandler Parsons......... who is definitely not The Dream. But.... on the other hand, he's essentially already Chandler Parsons, and an 80+ player is already a huge deal to draft young) I've never once changed draft strength from 40 in either direction. This is sheer dumbass luck, a VSM special. Any way you could sort of keep tabs on this draft class as our years roll along? The way you're describing this year's class makes it sound like we could legit be talking about an all-time legendary draft class on par with 2003, 1996, or 1984 and it'd be interesting to see just how this all plays out.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2020 13:23
|
|
|
Wait, what does that second vote even mean? How are lottery odds determined if they aren’t based on final record?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2020 04:58
|
|
|
A. Maybe a couple years from now, the rookies make him superfluous so we trade him off for depth/assets...but right now, losing a young star for nothing except cap space would be completely indefensible.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2020 19:30
|
|
|
whowhatwhere posted:So what do they put effort into, since the sim elements of the game are clearly ignored? Fixing existing issues is not a priority unless they are so noticeable that it stops people from buying the game.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2020 12:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 10:50 |
|
|
B A A Your team has some players with serious potential already, so you do need to consider positional fit and suitability, not just straight "get whoever's best". Extending the draft ages in a simulation game seems kind of meaningless? Especially since I seriously doubt NBA2K's rookie-generation algorithm actually takes the new rule into account - you'd expect "all players are 3 years from HS" would result in draftable rookies having higher current stats but lower potential due to being older and closer to their ceiling...but haha, not a chance NBA2K does that. Also, ugh, that lottery reform proposal. I know it's based on a real idea that media members have floated but it's laughable if you consider NBA history. Orlando won the lottery in back-to-back years (beating something like 42-1 odds the second time!) and teams flipped out enough that the league changed the lottery odds to make it harder for good teams to get top picks. That rule would last just as long as it took for some near-playoff 44-38 team to land the #1 pick before teams would immediately want it changed back. Besides, the whole point of recent lottery reforms has been to minimize tanking and this actually goes the other way - if you're a bad team, you're better off tanking for the guaranteed #2 pick than hoping you can win four straight games. It would also incentive the worst playoff teams tanking, because finishing just outside the playoffs and snagging the #1 seed is far more valuable than getting swept 4-0 in the first round
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2020 13:10
|
|