NBA 2K18 All-Time teams!!!!!

[Sportsdude360]

Is anyone else having as much fun with the All-Time teams as I am? I made a custom MYLeague with the All-Time teams and I've been having a blast!!!

I continue to be impressed with the All-Time rosters! As a Mavericks fan, having prime Dirk join forces with prime Mark Aguirre, Derek Harper, Sam Perkins and Rolando Blackman is a real treat! I've also been having fun with the All-Time Rockets! Seeing Ralph Sampson(7'4") and Yao Ming(7'6") on the floor at same time is jaw dropping!!

And having Larry Bird and Kevin McHale join forces with Bob Cousy and Bill Russell on the All-Time Celtics is almost unfair!

Anyone else having this much fun?

[Dee4Three]

While I share your optimism about those players actually being included in the regular game, I can't get passed how poorly done those teams are art wise and accuracy wise. Using the teams in a super dark, dead stadium doesn't help either.

Maybe because I've been modding over the last 4 years this stuff bothers me even more. I'm hoping the rest of the modding community (Including myself with roster tweaks) can yet these teams/players looking and playing the right way. Hopefully we can put some life into this game.

Glad you mentioned the Celtics, that team is absolutely deadly. Glad you and others are enjoying the All Time Team's aspect of the game.

[dyopopoy]

Meh, I kind of doing this for years now.
I put legends as the rookies of MyLeague. Every year, new draft class. (50's legends, then 60's the next year, 70's the next, and so on)
[I hate having generic CPU generated rookies]
So in a few seasons, I have a mix of legends and present superstars in each teams.

Wait till the all star game. It'll be fun to have superstars in all eras, mixed, in both teams.

[Andrew]

I haven't played any games with the All-Time teams yet, but I'm planning on making use of them this year. Definitely cool to see them finally officially in the game.

[Sportsdude360]

They certainly are fun to play with! Easily the best addition 2K has made to their NBA franchise!

[Andrew]

Played a game between the All-Time Bulls (me, obviously) and the All-Time Utah Jazz. Some good back and forth, though I ultimately prevailed. Kinda struggled to finish at the rim with MJ at times which was surprising. John Stockton also seemed to take way too many shots given his penchant for passing, but it was fun to be able to play with those squads out of the box.

[hedop]

They didn't even update some of the faces that date back to 2k11. Bill Laimbeer still looks like absolute shit. The ratings also seems a joke. Wes Unseld basically never shot a threepointer in his life yet he has a 3 point rating of 78. Dave Cowens basically never shot threepointers either and the few he did he missed or hit one in 10 or something. Again... Rating is 78. That's a bad, bad joke. Dr. J plays like shit. A young Doc should be able to basically be like Bo Williams in that great old videogame. However he rarely dunks in traffic and he rarely loses the ball on spin moves or in traffic half the time. Tiny Archibald should feel incredibly quick. However he doesn't since half the players on the All Time teams have a physical (and therefore also speed rating) of at least a B+. That's a friggin joke. It's like they cobbled together these ratings to not hurt feelings.

Yes Billy Cunningham was a good player, but especially at 31 years old, he wasn't a 91. There are a few elite players every generation who go over 91. The problem with 2k ratings is that they don't want to hurt anybodies feelings. But how the hell do scrubs get to be 71 or 72. That's the main problem. Marcus Smart isn't an 80 rated player. Neither is Jae Crowder. Those are players that should be in the mid 70s. Boogie isn't a 90 something. Boogie should be penalized for being a massive liability on D and fat as fuck. I don't care about gaudy numbers. If you are too fat to get back on D, get thrown out of every second game and even if you are on D you play like a cardboard cut out then you do not deserve to be a 90 something if a guy like Al Horford who is forced to play and Defend the 5 against guys who are 3-5 inches taller and 30-60 pounds heavier, is a great passer, a good defender and a capable scorer is barely an 80. That's a fucking joke and disgrace. No 10th or 11th man on an NBA roster is a 70. No one.

And that's the problem. They don't use the whole spectrum so stars don't feel as powerful as they should. If you play any NBA team besides the Warriors and maybe Cavs with an All-Time team, you should be able to blow them out by 50 even of the highest difficulty because the lack of skills should be this apparent. No JR Smith can't guard Doc or Jerry or Rick Barry. He can't guard a sack of cement. They should blow by him. In turn that should wear out Lebron after 2 quarters because he would have to defend 3 or 4 guys in the paint. The warriors are this good because they have a deep bench. No one can match that because no one else in the league goes 5-7 players deep on the bench with 70+ rated guys. Most teams have maybe 2 70 rated guys and afterwards maybe another 2 65 rated guys and that's it. Luol Deng is not a 70 anymore, neither is Mozgov, Carroll or any other of these scrubs. Ryan Anderson is not a 78. If he was, the whole league would be trying to trade for him. However nobody wants him because he has zero athleticism, can't rebound and can't defend. He can shoot. So every other category should be a D at best. That should put him right in the 71 rating range and feels about right. Instead they have 9 players rated 71 and above. Troy Williams, a guy who played 30 games last year. Seriously??? How can this scrub be a 71 when Al Horford is only a 83? How?

[Andrew]

I haven't looked through all the ratings yet, but those examples...yikes.

I'm with you on ratings scales, too. Sure, every game has its own way of calculating overalls, and sometimes certain individual ratings fudge that a bit, but it does seem a bit off. I thought they'd landed on a good idea a couple of years back with the "Hall of Fame Ratings Scale" approach, but it hasn't panned out. Of course, the idea could still have merit, and it could just be that it's not being implemented well. Bottom line, definitely some off ratings as your examples demonstrate.

[hedop]

I haven't looked through all the ratings yet, but those examples...yikes.

I'm with you on ratings scales, too. Sure, every game has its own way of calculating overalls, and sometimes certain individual ratings fudge that a bit, but it does seem a bit off. I thought they'd landed on a good idea a couple of years back with the "Hall of Fame Ratings Scale" approach, but it hasn't panned out. Of course, the idea could still have merit, and it could just be that it's not being implemented well. Bottom line, definitely some off ratings as your examples demonstrate.

There are quite a few issues with ratings. The problem is that they are afraid to show up some of the legends. Michael Jordan isn't a 99. I'm sorry but he isn't. We haven't seen a 99 player yet. Even for his position MJ wasn't an exceptional rebounder and he was a mediocre 3 point shooter at best. He was one of the best defenders inside and out the league has ever seen. Probably the best scorer inside the 3 point line the league has ever seen. Possibly, together with young Lebron, the best athlete the league has ever seen when you put together size, weight, body fat ratio and the times he ran, his vertical, his strength etc. So I'm not sure how they would calculate that but he can't be a 99 if he is more or less mediocre, which would be a 50 or 60 on 4-5 categories.

Like you said I do agree rating downwards is a good way to do it. Take the real rebounding numbers (meaning you should adjust the numbers from the 50s and 60s) and factor in height and other players at that position and you will get a certain number. That number would then be used in a ranking. I'm fairly sure that Dennis Rodman would come out on top overall and especially defensively and Charles Barkley on the offensive glass. You can do the same with every category. You have objective numbers available to the general public for dash times, vertical etc. When it comes to the legends this might be a bit harder, however, you would only have to do that once for the legends so it's a one time thing workwise. So what if Bill Russel and Wilt would not crack a 90. That doesn't matter because very few Centers probably would. Bill Walton might for one year of his career. Kareem might for the Bucks and pre-Magic years, Hakeem might for 94/95 and 2000 Shaq might. I don't see any other Centers getting there quite honestly because their numbers are inflated as hell, especially the older ones. Yes they were dominant but they were dominant like 3 feet around the rim, most of them couldn't pass, a lot of them were fairly terribly defenders (see Wilt for that), had no jumpshot at all, were lacking in athleticism and, especially for their size and how close they were to the rim, were fairly rubbish rebounders. Even nowadays there is no reason why any Center playing 32 minutes should not be able to get 20 Boards on average. That's your only job nowadays. You don't carry a team, you defend inside, rebound and you are a rim runner. You mostly won't get double teamed, you won't be asked to score 30 points, most teams don't even bother with offensive rebounding so you won't be asked to run back on defense when you don't get the board. Hell Dennis Rodman at 6'8 grabbed 17 rebounds on average while also playing lockdown defense inside and out, running the fast break as a decoy, grabbing offensive rebounds and while being punched and kicked and shoved by guys 50 pounds heavier and a head taller. So how in the world does Boogie get an A in rebounding when he grabs 10 or 11 boards on average being 7 feet and weighing 500 pounds?

[Andrew]

I would assume current player ratings will fluctuate as the season progresses, as per usual. It'll be interesting to see if they do update the historical players at all. Apparently they're going to fix up some of their Badges, if nothing else.

[hedop]

I would assume current player ratings will fluctuate as the season progresses, as per usual. It'll be interesting to see if they do update the historical players at all. Apparently they're going to fix up some of their Badges, if nothing else.

Well... fluctuate... yeah by like 2-3 points. Derrick Rose got a minimum contract because that was all that was on the table for him. He is still a high 70s player when in fact he is probably more a 70. Even last year he stayed over 80. So... no sorry and tbh I don't buy that fluctuation crap anyway unless it's like a massive drop in performance or age has somehow caught up to somebody. I don't buy the: well he has had 10 good games against shitty teams so we will give him 3 or 4 points more. It took them a year to even give The Brow anything higher than an F in 3 Point shooting when he was shooting 35% from the field on 2 tries per game. Same with Marc Gasol and Brook Lopez.

[Andrew]

I'll rephrase. I'm sure that ratings for current players will change, though it remains to be seen whether they'll be satisfactory changes. The same goes for the historical players, though I kind of have my doubts, outside of resolving the issue with the Badges since that's been specifically mentioned. I suppose it's therefore fortunate that we actually do have roster editing in NBA 2K; it's feasible to re-work the system ourselves, making adjustments as we please, and share the results.

[hedop]

I'll rephrase. I'm sure that ratings for current players will change, though it remains to be seen whether they'll be satisfactory changes. The same goes for the historical players, though I kind of have my doubts, outside of resolving the issue with the Badges since that's been specifically mentioned. I suppose it's therefore fortunate that we actually do have roster editing in NBA 2K; it's feasible to re-work the system ourselves, making adjustments as we please, and share the results.

Honestly I would already be happy if someone could finally give one of my favourite players of all time Bill Laimbeer a face worthy of being in the game.

[Dee4Three]

I haven't looked through all the ratings yet, but those examples...yikes.

I'm with you on ratings scales, too. Sure, every game has its own way of calculating overalls, and sometimes certain individual ratings fudge that a bit, but it does seem a bit off. I thought they'd landed on a good idea a couple of years back with the "Hall of Fame Ratings Scale" approach, but it hasn't panned out. Of course, the idea could still have merit, and it could just be that it's not being implemented well. Bottom line, definitely some off ratings as your examples demonstrate.

There are quite a few issues with ratings. The problem is that they are afraid to show up some of the legends. Michael Jordan isn't a 99. I'm sorry but he isn't. We haven't seen a 99 player yet. Even for his position MJ wasn't an exceptional rebounder and he was a mediocre 3 point shooter at best. He was one of the best defenders inside and out the league has ever seen. Probably the best scorer inside the 3 point line the league has ever seen. Possibly, together with young Lebron, the best athlete the league has ever seen when you put together size, weight, body fat ratio and the times he ran, his vertical, his strength etc. So I'm not sure how they would calculate that but he can't be a 99 if he is more or less mediocre, which would be a 50 or 60 on 4-5 categories.

Like you said I do agree rating downwards is a good way to do it. Take the real rebounding numbers (meaning you should adjust the numbers from the 50s and 60s) and factor in height and other players at that position and you will get a certain number. That number would then be used in a ranking. I'm fairly sure that Dennis Rodman would come out on top overall and especially defensively and Charles Barkley on the offensive glass. You can do the same with every category. You have objective numbers available to the general public for dash times, vertical etc. When it comes to the legends this might be a bit harder, however, you would only have to do that once for the legends so it's a one time thing workwise. So what if Bill Russel and Wilt would not crack a 90. That doesn't matter because very few Centers probably would. Bill Walton might for one year of his career. Kareem might for the Bucks and pre-Magic years, Hakeem might for 94/95 and 2000 Shaq might. I don't see any other Centers getting there quite honestly because their numbers are inflated as hell, especially the older ones. Yes they were dominant but they were dominant like 3 feet around the rim, most of them couldn't pass, a lot of them were fairly terribly defenders (see Wilt for that), had no jumpshot at all, were lacking in athleticism and, especially for their size and how close they were to the rim, were fairly rubbish rebounders. Even nowadays there is no reason why any Center playing 32 minutes should not be able to get 20 Boards on average. That's your only job nowadays. You don't carry a team, you defend inside, rebound and you are a rim runner. You mostly won't get double teamed, you won't be asked to score 30 points, most teams don't even bother with offensive rebounding so you won't be asked to run back on defense when you don't get the board. Hell Dennis Rodman at 6'8 grabbed 17 rebounds on average while also playing lockdown defense inside and out, running the fast break as a decoy, grabbing offensive rebounds and while being punched and kicked and shoved by guys 50 pounds heavier and a head taller. So how in the world does Boogie get an A in rebounding when he grabs 10 or 11 boards on average being 7 feet and weighing 500 pounds?

The problem is: the focus with 2k is on the overall, not what makes up that overall.

I went back and forth with a couple people about this who complained that I had the 10-11 Dirk at 86 overall and the 10-11 Rose at 90 overall in my rosters. The only way to make the 10-11 Dirk higher overall is to make a him a better defender than he really was that season, to make him elite at things he wasn't elite at. Same with Rose, I would have had to sacrifice realism for a number and make him an elite defender or elite at things he shouldn't be.

The URB people from 2K13 and 2K14 have a similar philosophy (however, maybe even more aggressive in it than I). You don't sacrifice a player's realism on the court for an overall. Political obviously have a play in this when it comes to 2K, they are trying to not hurt feelings with many of the ratings. Also, many of the ratings look off, not researched, and just thrown together. I make so many adjustments.

[Andrew]

My go to examples for the difficulty with overall ratings are Steve Nash and Josh Smith in the mid to late 2000s. Athletic and dunking ratings artificially dragged down and boosted their overalls respectively; same deal with defense. Their overalls never looked quite right because of the way they were calculated. I've always found if the individual ratings are accurate, then the overall will at least be in the ballpark. Tough to get perfection without fudging ratings here and there, and then you've got imperfections elsewhere.

[TGsoGood]

The key is to just use the intagible rating

[Andrew]

Definitely helpful, now that we have that in the game.