16-17 Gobert and 14-15 DeAndre Jordan are about the same value, imo.

Is Giannis > Bird now? Higher efg and fta.

Plus the blocks and higher stl%.

That's a great comp. the 16-17 Giannis is practically a clone of the 84-85 90 def bird season. Bird more minutes and lower fouls might give slightest edge.

Bird still has the higher shooting but only 64 Def 87-88 season which Giannis can probably eclipse as he gets better while maintaining the D.

Posted by pointfwd on 6/29/2017 11:57:00 AM (view original):
Is Giannis > Bird now? Higher efg and fta.

Plus the blocks and higher stl%.

higher efg%? maybe you're not using the right Bird?

Posted by copernicus on 6/29/2017 9:44:00 AM (view original):
http://www.82games.com/1617/1617MIL2.HTM

of the top 20 rotations by minutes played last season for the Bucks Giannis played exactly none as a 2 guard so what did they get wrong?

Basically the same reasoning behind giving Lebron point guard eligibility should apply for Giannis. He's their primary ball handler and distributor. Don't see why that's controversial.

Posted by superrobb420 on 6/29/2017 1:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by copernicus on 6/29/2017 9:44:00 AM (view original):
http://www.82games.com/1617/1617MIL2.HTM

of the top 20 rotations by minutes played last season for the Bucks Giannis played exactly none as a 2 guard so what did they get wrong?

Basically the same reasoning behind giving Lebron point guard eligibility should apply for Giannis. He's their primary ball handler and distributor. Don't see why that's controversial.

I think the question is whether he (Giannis) would be capable of performing those functions playing (both offense and defense) against opposing guards, rather than forwards who on average are bigger and maybe slightly less quick and nimble. I think Lebron has had that capability throughout his career. So did early Grant Hill, so it's always driven me crazy that he's not 100% at SG. I'm less sure about GIannis.

Posted by superrobb420 on 6/29/2017 1:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by copernicus on 6/29/2017 9:44:00 AM (view original):
http://www.82games.com/1617/1617MIL2.HTM

of the top 20 rotations by minutes played last season for the Bucks Giannis played exactly none as a 2 guard so what did they get wrong?

Basically the same reasoning behind giving Lebron point guard eligibility should apply for Giannis. He's their primary ball handler and distributor. Don't see why that's controversial.

I don't think they should give Lebron eligibility at positions he didn't play at either

in any event it seems like you're assuming rational/conscious decision making on the part of WIS when in fact it's just an equation that takes into account certain stats plus height/weight

I notice that Westbrook isn't listed as 100% effective at SG, which seems bizarre. Especially given that Stockton, who's a couple inches shorter, 30 pounds lighter, and the quintessential playmaking PG of all time, is consistently classed as 100% at both backcourt positions.

But Giannis did play point guard is my argument. There's a reason that basketball-reference switched to doing lineups alphabetically. It's a l more difficult to look at 5 guys and tell who is playing which position. Height and weight kind of goes out the window.

Posted by longtallbrad on 6/29/2017 2:55:00 PM (view original):
I notice that Westbrook isn't listed as 100% effective at SG, which seems bizarre. Especially given that Stockton, who's a couple inches shorter, 30 pounds lighter, and the quintessential playmaking PG of all time, is consistently classed as 100% at both backcourt positions.

Position effectiveness consistency in the NBA sim has never been good imo. Take a look at MJ, Bird, etc.

Posted by ncmusician_7 on 6/29/2017 3:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by longtallbrad on 6/29/2017 2:55:00 PM (view original):
I notice that Westbrook isn't listed as 100% effective at SG, which seems bizarre. Especially given that Stockton, who's a couple inches shorter, 30 pounds lighter, and the quintessential playmaking PG of all time, is consistently classed as 100% at both backcourt positions.

Position effectiveness consistency in the NBA sim has never been good imo. Take a look at MJ, Bird, etc.

I haven't looked hard to enough to try to infer the basis for decision-making, but it comes across as an uneven mixture of the positions guys actually played and the positions they were capable of playing. I believe Bill Russell was always the center and Duncan was rarely listed as a center, but both are always 100% effective at both, which they should be. Whereas it's nuts to me that Bird's effectiveness at SF varies by season, and that Jordan gets discounted at PG early in his career. I realize WIS staff prefer to avoid subjective judgments like this, but they are needed at times to nudge algorithm outputs closer to the "what if" realism that is supposed to be the site's premise.

Posted by superrobb420 on 6/29/2017 3:32:00 PM (view original):
But Giannis did play point guard is my argument. There's a reason that basketball-reference switched to doing lineups alphabetically. It's a l more difficult to look at 5 guys and tell who is playing which position. Height and weight kind of goes out the window.

not according to 82 games - they have guys like Snell, Delladova, Brogdon and Jason Terry listed in the highest % of minutes in the 1 and 2 spots w none allotted to Giannis

of course if what you're saying is that Giannis did PG-like things I would argue that there have been a handful of "pt forwards" who should not be 100% at PG even though they did some PG like things - the fact is they didn't play the position, they didn't defend the position etc

I think all players should be 100% at at least 2 positions.

Posted by copernicus on 6/29/2017 4:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by superrobb420 on 6/29/2017 3:32:00 PM (view original):
But Giannis did play point guard is my argument. There's a reason that basketball-reference switched to doing lineups alphabetically. It's a l more difficult to look at 5 guys and tell who is playing which position. Height and weight kind of goes out the window.

not according to 82 games - they have guys like Snell, Delladova, Brogdon and Jason Terry listed in the highest % of minutes in the 1 and 2 spots w none allotted to Giannis

of course if what you're saying is that Giannis did PG-like things I would argue that there have been a handful of "pt forwards" who should not be 100% at PG even though they did some PG like things - the fact is they didn't play the position, they didn't defend the position etc

You're kind of making the point that 82games isn't a good resource. Tony Snell and Matthew Dellavadova aren't point guards. Calling Jason Terry a point guard at this point in his career is iffy as well. Brogdon, maybe.

What I'm saying is that when a guy's primary role is to bring the ball up and run the offense, he is the point guard whether he is the shortest guy on the floor or not. This isn't doing point guard like things. This is playing point guard.

Posted by superrobb420 on 6/29/2017 6:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by copernicus on 6/29/2017 4:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by superrobb420 on 6/29/2017 3:32:00 PM (view original):
But Giannis did play point guard is my argument. There's a reason that basketball-reference switched to doing lineups alphabetically. It's a l more difficult to look at 5 guys and tell who is playing which position. Height and weight kind of goes out the window.

not according to 82 games - they have guys like Snell, Delladova, Brogdon and Jason Terry listed in the highest % of minutes in the 1 and 2 spots w none allotted to Giannis

of course if what you're saying is that Giannis did PG-like things I would argue that there have been a handful of "pt forwards" who should not be 100% at PG even though they did some PG like things - the fact is they didn't play the position, they didn't defend the position etc

You're kind of making the point that 82games isn't a good resource. Tony Snell and Matthew Dellavadova aren't point guards. Calling Jason Terry a point guard at this point in his career is iffy as well. Brogdon, maybe.

What I'm saying is that when a guy's primary role is to bring the ball up and run the offense, he is the point guard whether he is the shortest guy on the floor or not. This isn't doing point guard like things. This is playing point guard.

This argument is among the sillier things argued on this site, which is saying a lot.

At the end of the day, they have to create a generic formula that gets as close to 100% of the players right. It does a damn good job. Probably 95%-99% are correct, and the only ones that can be debated are among the most unique players in basketball history. Perhaps it may get trickier in the modern era as the game becomes more positionless.

The alternative is going player by player and doing it manually which is just as asinine request.

D ratings are worthy of an argument... but it is really around is the methodology the most effective one. That is hard to do without someone cracking the code. Arguing specific players' ratings is a pointless argument.