Post by TinyTimPig on May 24, 2021 12:59:02 GMT -5
Now that we've had a couple of overlapping classes, I decided to take a look at how some of the 5.0 and 6.0 profiles compared and how Eric interpreted them. For the most part, Delap's profiles were much shorter, which I think left a lot more up to Eric's interpretation (generally resulting in ratings in the 50-60 range).
As I didn't want to reveal full builds for players who are not mine, I instead am showing the difference between the 5.0 and 6.0 version below. So if you see a "+20", that means the 6.0 version of the player had 20 higher <attribute> than the 5.0 version.
Andrew Bynum:
Net: -21
5.0 Draft: 1.2 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.3 (Profile)
Synopsis: Overall pretty similar builds in 5.0 and 6.0, with the major selling point being his remarkably high potential. Today's version of Bynum has significantly lower inside than his 5.0 counterpart which has limited his ceiling with both versions having a broken jumper. The biggest win for 6.0 Bynum has been a better handling/passing ratio, as the old version did have some TO issues, despite his profile indicating that he wouldn't be all that turnover prone.
Charlie Villanueva:
Net: -27
5.0 Draft: 1.7 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.18 (Profile)
Synopsis: Lots of similarities in his 5.0 and 6.0 builds, with the biggest differences being handling and passing (+14 in each category in 5.0) and the defensive attributes, which make sense when you read the profiles. JHB wrote him up as being a "passable" post defender with good instincts and timing as well as the ability to get out and play some on the wing, though he did mention that may not work in TMBSL. Delap was much less kind to Villanueva on that side of the ball, emphasizing poor perimeter D and willingness to let his man establish post position. Like JHB mentioned with Perimeter D, Delap highlighted that Charlie could block some shots but it's possible that wouldn't translate to the pros. It most certainly didn't, as he averaged just 0.3 blocks per 36 during his 5.0 career.
Corey Brewer:
Net: +138
5.0 Draft: 1.4 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.11 (Profile)
Synopsis: It's a little bit surprising to see the 6.0 version of Brewer with so much less offensive acumen, despite his 5.0 profile having nothing but negatives to say on that side of the ball - "Offensively, though, he's pretty weak. He'll take and make 3s... but his form is bad. He doesn't create his own shot or attack the rim regularly, so he's going to need a strong supporting cast to be an effective offensive piece." Both versions have been very solid perimeter defenders, but the 5.0 version actually was able to put together a career 1.10 pts/tsa, which his much higher offensive starting build allowed for.
Greg Oden:
Net: -54
5.0 Draft: 1.2 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.10 (Profile)
Synopsis: I think we were all surprised to see Oden with such a low offensive ceiling and the comparison to 5.0 reflects that with a 40-point difference in inside rating. I feel like, overall, the intent in the profiles was the same, with JHB's going into a bit more detail than Delap's "His back to the basket game isn't polished, but the pieces are there for a great offensive player with the right coach and system." The extra emphasis in his 6.0 profile has led to .02 fewer pts/tsa and nearly 7 fewer points per 36.
Lou Williams:
Net: -154
5.0 Draft: 1.6 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.12 (Profile)
Synopsis: LMAO imagine being the dumbass who took a Lou Williams whose cumulative rating was 154 points lower than his 5.0 counterpart. The biggest differences were in his athletic attributes - +24 quickness and +34 jumping in 5.0 - and his outside scoring - +15 jumper and +20 threes in 5.0. His 5.0 profile made no mention of his passing or ball handling skills, so it's certainly interesting to see a 45-point difference in the handling attribute in particular. The athletic differences are noteworthy, with "exceptional" quickness in 6.0 resulting in a 24-point decrease from his 5.0 "great" quickness. No mention of his "awesome" vertical leap in 6.0 resulted in a 34-point drop in jumping.
Marc Gasol:
Net: -2
5.0 Draft: 1.3 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.1 (Profile)
Synopsis: The smallest net change in any of the players I looked at, but a very different player nonetheless. His 5.0 profile was short - just a few sentences - leaving a lot more up to Eric's interpretation. Delap's version of Gasol was a much more ready-made prospect with better inside scoring, defense, and rebounding and 30 (!!!) less potential. JHB's version also highlighted Gasol as much more of a distributor than Delap's profile, who focused mostly on his strength.
Marvin Williams:
Net: -32
5.0 Draft: 1.3 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.6 (Profile)
Synopsis: 5.0 Marvin is probably what most of us wanted to see in 6.0 Marvin, but 5.0 Marvin was also listed at power forward. Both profiles highlighted a strong jumper and that was reflected in the build, but it's interesting to see a difference of 20 in strength when both profiles highlighted it as a positive. The big differences, of course, are the huge gap in inside and the difference in potential, which I think we'd describe as going from high in 5.0 to middling in 6.0.
As I didn't want to reveal full builds for players who are not mine, I instead am showing the difference between the 5.0 and 6.0 version below. So if you see a "+20", that means the 6.0 version of the player had 20 higher <attribute> than the 5.0 version.
Andrew Bynum:
Ins Jumper Threes Handling Quick Pass Steal Block Post D Perim D Drive D O Reb D Reb Str Jump Pot
-20 +5 0 +30 -20 -4 +6 -14 +25 -5 -4 0 -10 +10 -20 0
Net: -21
5.0 Draft: 1.2 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.3 (Profile)
Synopsis: Overall pretty similar builds in 5.0 and 6.0, with the major selling point being his remarkably high potential. Today's version of Bynum has significantly lower inside than his 5.0 counterpart which has limited his ceiling with both versions having a broken jumper. The biggest win for 6.0 Bynum has been a better handling/passing ratio, as the old version did have some TO issues, despite his profile indicating that he wouldn't be all that turnover prone.
Charlie Villanueva:
Ins Jumper Threes Handling Quick Pass Steal Block Post D Perim D Drive D O Reb D Reb Str Jump Pot
-4 -5 -5 -14 +5 -14 +6 +6 +15 +10 -4 -10 +20 -4 -20 0Net: -27
5.0 Draft: 1.7 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.18 (Profile)
Synopsis: Lots of similarities in his 5.0 and 6.0 builds, with the biggest differences being handling and passing (+14 in each category in 5.0) and the defensive attributes, which make sense when you read the profiles. JHB wrote him up as being a "passable" post defender with good instincts and timing as well as the ability to get out and play some on the wing, though he did mention that may not work in TMBSL. Delap was much less kind to Villanueva on that side of the ball, emphasizing poor perimeter D and willingness to let his man establish post position. Like JHB mentioned with Perimeter D, Delap highlighted that Charlie could block some shots but it's possible that wouldn't translate to the pros. It most certainly didn't, as he averaged just 0.3 blocks per 36 during his 5.0 career.
Corey Brewer:
Ins Jumper Threes Handling Quick Pass Steal Block Post D Perim D Drive D O Reb D Reb Str Jump Pot
-14 -4 +1 +1 -15 +25 +15 +20 +16 +25 +1 +6 +1 -10 +40 +30
Net: +138
5.0 Draft: 1.4 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.11 (Profile)
Synopsis: It's a little bit surprising to see the 6.0 version of Brewer with so much less offensive acumen, despite his 5.0 profile having nothing but negatives to say on that side of the ball - "Offensively, though, he's pretty weak. He'll take and make 3s... but his form is bad. He doesn't create his own shot or attack the rim regularly, so he's going to need a strong supporting cast to be an effective offensive piece." Both versions have been very solid perimeter defenders, but the 5.0 version actually was able to put together a career 1.10 pts/tsa, which his much higher offensive starting build allowed for.
Greg Oden:
Ins Jumper Threes Handling Quick Pass Steal Block Post D Perim D Drive D O Reb D Reb Str Jump Pot
-40 +6 -10 +25 +15 -15 -4 -10 -4 -4 -4 -10 -15 -4 +20 0
Net: -54
5.0 Draft: 1.2 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.10 (Profile)
Synopsis: I think we were all surprised to see Oden with such a low offensive ceiling and the comparison to 5.0 reflects that with a 40-point difference in inside rating. I feel like, overall, the intent in the profiles was the same, with JHB's going into a bit more detail than Delap's "His back to the basket game isn't polished, but the pieces are there for a great offensive player with the right coach and system." The extra emphasis in his 6.0 profile has led to .02 fewer pts/tsa and nearly 7 fewer points per 36.
Lou Williams:
Ins Jumper Threes Handling Quick Pass Steal Block Post D Perim D Drive D O Reb D Reb Str Jump Pot
+10 -15 -20 -45 -24 +5 -10 0 -5 +5 -4 -14 -14 +11 -34 0
Net: -154
5.0 Draft: 1.6 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.12 (Profile)
Synopsis: LMAO imagine being the dumbass who took a Lou Williams whose cumulative rating was 154 points lower than his 5.0 counterpart. The biggest differences were in his athletic attributes - +24 quickness and +34 jumping in 5.0 - and his outside scoring - +15 jumper and +20 threes in 5.0. His 5.0 profile made no mention of his passing or ball handling skills, so it's certainly interesting to see a 45-point difference in the handling attribute in particular. The athletic differences are noteworthy, with "exceptional" quickness in 6.0 resulting in a 24-point decrease from his 5.0 "great" quickness. No mention of his "awesome" vertical leap in 6.0 resulted in a 34-point drop in jumping.
Marc Gasol:
Ins Jumper Threes Handling Quick Pass Steal Block Post D Perim D Drive D O Reb D Reb Str Jump Pot
-20 +20 +25 +35 -5 +35 -4 -14 -15 -15 -4 -35 -15 0 -20 +30
Net: -2
5.0 Draft: 1.3 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.1 (Profile)
Synopsis: The smallest net change in any of the players I looked at, but a very different player nonetheless. His 5.0 profile was short - just a few sentences - leaving a lot more up to Eric's interpretation. Delap's version of Gasol was a much more ready-made prospect with better inside scoring, defense, and rebounding and 30 (!!!) less potential. JHB's version also highlighted Gasol as much more of a distributor than Delap's profile, who focused mostly on his strength.
Marvin Williams:
Ins Jumper Threes Handling Quick Pass Steal Block Post D Perim D Drive D O Reb D Reb Str Jump Pot
-25 0 +5 +5 +10 +15 +25 -4 -14 -10 -4 -10 -5 -20 +15 -15
Net: -32
5.0 Draft: 1.3 (Profile)
6.0 Draft: 1.6 (Profile)
Synopsis: 5.0 Marvin is probably what most of us wanted to see in 6.0 Marvin, but 5.0 Marvin was also listed at power forward. Both profiles highlighted a strong jumper and that was reflected in the build, but it's interesting to see a difference of 20 in strength when both profiles highlighted it as a positive. The big differences, of course, are the huge gap in inside and the difference in potential, which I think we'd describe as going from high in 5.0 to middling in 6.0.
