What's new
By:

2022 Annual Jazzfanz All Time NBA Draft

Like everything that is computer-based, it’s flawed. It’s not going to take into consideration chemistry, intangibles, leadership, and so forth.

This is a Jazz message board. With users, not bots. Have them vote. Get 60% of votes and you win…

I’d hold off on doing some for the whole thing til later as it could skew some people’s opinions.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Every point of analysis contains some bias, though. Teams that didn’t make it a point to stack players with gawdy production are at a competitive disadvantage. Maybe the 2k people actually gave proper balance to defensive impact, unselfishness, locker room dynamics, passing (that doesn’t always show up in assists), but that sounds like a monumental achievement since the game is so dynamic.

As it stands, a sim makes me think that whoever has Wilt Chamberlain or Michael Jordan will just win. Or a team with Oscar Robertson and Allen Iverson.

The least biased route would be balancing biases against each other.
Click to expand...
John Havlicek is one of the better players in the game btw. You got a steal.
 
Keefe said:
Like everything that is computer-based, it’s flawed. It’s not going to take into consideration chemistry, intangibles, leadership, and so forth.

This is a Jazz message board. With users, not bots. Have them vote. Get 60% of votes and you win…

I’d hold off on doing some for the whole thing til later as it could skew some people’s opinions.
Click to expand...
Too much bias in that. If you've never seen Havlicek, Irving, or any of the old gen players play how can you give an accurate opinion? That's where that logic is heavily flawed, and the better team gets screwed by casual fan mindset.

2k has a complex system in play that gives far more accurate results than people who don't know every player drafted, and hold bias to certain players. It's not even debatable that a large percentage of people here carry bias towards combo-guards, or volume shooting guards/forwards that shoot a high volume.
 
Keefe said:
Like everything that is computer-based, it’s flawed. It’s not going to take into consideration chemistry, intangibles, leadership, and so forth.

This is a Jazz message board. With users, not bots. Have them vote. Get 60% of votes and you win…

I’d hold off on doing some for the whole thing til later as it could skew some people’s opinions.
Click to expand...
Too much bias in that. If you've never seen Havlicek, Irving, or any of the old gen players play how can you give an accurate opinion? That's where that logic is heavily flawed, and the better team gets screwed by casual fan mindset.

2k has a complex system in play that gives far more accurate results than people who don't know every player drafted, and hold bias to certain players. It's not even debatable that a large percentage of people here carry bias towards combo-guards, or volume shooting guards/forwards that shoot a high volume.
 
Keefe said:
Like everything that is computer-based, it’s flawed. It’s not going to take into consideration chemistry, intangibles, leadership, and so forth.

This is a Jazz message board. With users, not bots. Have them vote. Get 60% of votes and you win…

I’d hold off on doing some for the whole thing til later as it could skew some people’s opinions.
Click to expand...
And 2k does take chemistry and intangibles in play. It's literally an attribute for each player. Lol. I don't think you've played it lately.
 
The Fresh Prince said:
And 2k does take chemistry and intangibles in play. It's literally an attribute for each player. Lol. I don't think you've played it lately.
Click to expand...
Chemistry is not about a person. It’s about how the five people will work together cohesively on the court. Or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top