Ratings Buffs

[Marcos_Beck]

Guys, I read everything in the CSL x NBA thread, re-worked what I had based on tests and feedback from all of you, and want to present some suggestions so you guys can give me constructive feedback on how to improve.



@Silo: I didn't put it into a formula, but it's fairly easy to do if needed. The reason I did not was because I used existing ratings standards VERSUS future ratings standards (developed by me), both listed below:





Some current players exceed the standards ratings but as promised nobody will be nerfed if we ever opt to adjust league ratings globally. So they'll be the only available players above the standards, but future classes will be created with new standards in mind (so no player ever breaks the league).

Numbers are generally lower than NBA's best scorers' percentages because:
1st, higher scoring ratings helps with efficiency in DDS22
2nd, we don't want to see players shooting 60+% from 3-10, it would be unstopabble.

Suggestions are pretty simple: big buffs to FGRA and FGMID, buffs to COR and FTs and small buffs to ATB and ITP. Worst players gets higher buffs as it should be, so we don't break the league by buffing already top tier players.
If you look at the standards you'll realize how I came up with those exact numbers as a suggestion.

Maybe some will think for example 55 FGITP or FGMID is too high but that's why I want constructive feedback here.

Also, we need to VOTE whether we should change ratings or not. I'm giving a suggestion of what can be done so GMs understand what could change and what could improve with those types of boosts. I personally think boosts are VERY MUCH NEEDED but community should speak and decide.

[Silogical]

FGRA is already too strong this puts it way over the top.

just going over the teams all teams except for 3 are running post/balance/grind as their main offense

preimeter focus/seven seconds/pace and space is only being used by 3 tankers. combined 7-21

regarding the otehr buffs, seeing the formula is important. cor going from 19 to 21 is nothing but going from 35 to 37 is OP.

[Marcos_Beck]

FGRA is already too strong this puts it way over the top.

just going over the teams all teams except for 3 are running post/balance/grind as their main offense

preimeter focus/seven seconds/pace and space is only being used by 3 tankers. combined 7-21

regarding the otehr buffs, seeing the formula is important. cor going from 19 to 21 is nothing but going from 35 to 37 is OP.

Thanks for the feedback.

I strongly believe most of the players don't get rewarded for reaching the rim in this engine. We're shooting around 57% from 0-3 which is ABYSMAL if you look at the NBA numbers of 68-70% (which is frankly absurd and I want no part of that).
With stronger buffs than those to FGRA and FGITP we could only reach 61-62% in tests.
Of course, GMs will adapt to buffs and instruct players accordingly, but those buffs should put us in 60% 0-3 range conversion which is good. And will have a HUGE impact in most of the guards while having almost no impact to already dominant post players (who will not get more than +2 compared to +7 from players in need).
One of my other ideas is to suggest new limits to ball actions as post players are allowed too many shots with 30 Post Up + 13 Drive / Shoot + Post Offense for example. That would help offseting those marginal gains for dominant post players while allowing guards to at least develop a driving game. But that's for another time.

35 to 37 corner isn't that OP. We are surely talking about a buff to shooters, but it's still below league average for 3pt shooting (and below NBA's Corner efficiency as well).
35% on volume produces a 52.5% true shooting, exact CSL TS% in 2030-2031.
37% is 55.5% which is my TS% goal with the suggested changes (stronger buffs failed to reach 55% TS but I believe GMs will work their way up to 55.5% even with lower buffs).

Give me feedback on those arguments, tell me if the logic is valid and understandable.
Any other points I'm available to give you guys any feedback needed about my ideas.

[KW]

FG_ITP and RA_Rate are the biggest issues with inefficiency in this league. Without addressing that, you will not see any significant improvement from the low end scorers of this league.

[Marcos_Beck]

Also, look at old and new ratings averages across the league with the suggested buffs
Disclaimer = There's a 0.5 - 1.0 difference between current and potential ratings in our leagues as most of the players don't reach full potentials. A 78 potential FT average should produce a 77 to 77.5 current rating which is right around NBA mark for FTs for example.

FGRA
Old = 50,0 / 50,8
New = 56,2 / 56,9 (right on the spot for the 57 suggested average)

FGITP
Old = 40,1 / 41,0
New = 41,3 / 42,1 (right on the spot for the 42 suggested average)

FGMID
Old = 35,8 / 36,8
New = 40,4 / 41,3 (a bit lower than the 42 suggested average)

FGCOR
Old = 31,1 / 32,1
New = 33,9 / 34,7 (very far from the 37 suggested average)

FGATB
Old = 29,8 / 30,8
New = 32,3 / 33,1 (still far from the 35 suggested average)

FT
Old = 72,6 / 74,0
New = 75,2 / 76,4 (still far from the 78 suggested average)


This shows we can buff MID / COR / ATB / FT lower ends a bit more if we want averages to be higher.

[Marcos_Beck]

FG_ITP and RA_Rate are the biggest issues with inefficiency in this league. Without addressing that, you will not see any significant improvement from the low end scorers of this league.

Thanks for the feedback Kyrus. The idea was really to buff FGITP for worse players without touching best ones.
Players aren't really far from what they should be when it comes to FGITP. Buff it too much and you can make some players look to strong.
I understand buffing FGITP from 37 to 39 means very little, but it's a way of helping players who needs the buffs (mostly guards who shouldn't be scoring inside anyway) without buffing dominant ITP bigs.
Feel free to suggest something better, but mind the buffs to FGRA already. We always have to keep in mind those dominant post players.

IDK what to do with RA_Rate and Dunk_Rate quite honestly.
Just put it there so I wouldn't forget they need to be adjusted but I have no idea how, being 100% honest. Raising it by 50% seems a really bad idea as it will help dominant bigs but not guards who trully need it.
Bigs does seem to need help as much as guards in that department though, they also can't reach the rim enough IMO. But they are very strong already so....

[Silogical]

37 COR isnt OP a buff from 35 to 37 is OP compared to the other buffs. If these buffs were implemented some players would gain significantly more than others. The goal of buffs should be that all players gain equally.

I also think the FGRA buffs are OP and would turn the league into DDS19. if the inside average is 60% why would we instruct our players to shoot from anywhere else? or sign players who arnt inside players? That's 60% on top of the best place to draw fouls.

Just create some strong inside players with weak D. We can shape the league however we want without messing with ratings.

[Marcos_Beck]

37 COR isnt OP a buff from 35 to 37 is OP compared to the other buffs. If these buffs were implemented some players would gain significantly more than others. The goal of buffs should be that all players gain equally.

I also think the FGRA buffs are OP and would turn the league into DDS19. if the inside average is 60% why would we instruct our players to shoot from anywhere else? or sign players who arnt inside players? That's 60% on top of the best place to draw fouls.

Just create some strong inside players with weak D. We can shape the league however we want without messing with ratings.

I get the point, but this engine isn't DDS19. Players cannot reach the rim every time like they used to do in DDS19. In fact, 3-10 amount of shots are double 0-3 amount right now in average.
Also we have ball actions limits which doesn't allow a player to drive more than a certain amount of touches. So players won't be able to reach the rim at all costs once again.
Also, spacing matters, it has been tested twice. You can't just have every player clogging the lane in this engine, players will never reach the rim that way.

We are still aiming to be at 10% lower than NBA with those buffs, and top players who are currently dominating the league will marginally get buffed (Ayton, Zion will get really really minor buffs at all for example).

It's not really 60% inside, because in general players shoot way more from 3-10 than 0-3 in this engine. So it's basically 60%*1/3 + 45%*2/3 + 28% FT rate and 77% accuracy. For 100 shots, it's like 60% of 34 + 45% of 66 + 77% of 28 FTs = 54;3 TS%
This is literally the average CSL player with buffs.
Of course there will be players better than that, but that's like shooting 36% from deep on 100 shots. Almost same efficiency. And there are players who shoot way better than 36% from 3 as well. In fact CSL average is around 38% from deep.

[Marcos_Beck]

About the corner buffs, I didn't look at any specific players. I just picked the percentiles that needed more help according to the extensive studies and translated it into buffs.
No matter how ratings are adjusted, there's a point that for example, a player with 35 COR will become 37 COR while a player with 36 COR will also become 37 COR. Even if you use a formula. There has to be that point. I just defined it with the percentiles, easier than the formula. But honestly what I did can become a formula, Kyrus already did it once for example.

It's literally impossible for all players to gain equally if you want to buff worse players more than top players at each area.
Unless it's linear buffs (which can break the league and won't solve the issue where we have so many useless offensive players), it's impossible.

[TheTwoWallaces]

FGRA is already too strong this puts it way over the top.

just going over the teams all teams except for 3 are running post/balance/grind as their main offense

preimeter focus/seven seconds/pace and space is only being used by 3 tankers. combined 7-21

For the record, I'm 4-1 when using perimeter focus. Tried Grind last night and it didn't work

[Silogical]

It's literally impossible for all players to gain equally if you want to buff worse players more than top players at each area.
Unless it's linear buffs (which can break the league and won't solve the issue where we have so many useless offensive players), it's impossible.

you are buffing good players too much.

equally doesnt mean the same buff it means the impact the buff has.

FGRA 69 to 70 is stronger than all the other buffs even though its only 1 rating. if all these buffs happened players who have a good inside:outside ratio gain significantly more than 3-10, MID, COR, and ATB players.

The effect this will have is the weaker 3-10, MID, COR, and ATB players who are getting minutes will get pushed out for more inside play.

[Rizzo]

I'm so out of the game in terms of ratings in this engine and what we are working with, so I'm going to defer to the data nerds (Marcos, Silo, KW, bt, etc.) and let them take the wheel here. I wish that Dennis had the time on his hands to dive into this as well because I think he brings an analytical lense to a lot of things as well.

[Rizzo]

It's literally impossible for all players to gain equally if you want to buff worse players more than top players at each area.
Unless it's linear buffs (which can break the league and won't solve the issue where we have so many useless offensive players), it's impossible.

you are buffing good players too much.

equally doesnt mean the same buff it means the impact the buff has.

FGRA 69 to 70 is stronger than all the other buffs even though its only 1 rating. if all these buffs happened players who have a good inside:outside ratio gain significantly more than 3-10, MID, COR, and ATB players.

The effect this will have is the weaker 3-10, MID, COR, and ATB players who are getting minutes will get pushed out for more inside play.

Shhhh, DeAndre Ayton needs all the buffs he can get if I'm ever going to take home my own title!

[Marcos_Beck]

It's literally impossible for all players to gain equally if you want to buff worse players more than top players at each area.
Unless it's linear buffs (which can break the league and won't solve the issue where we have so many useless offensive players), it's impossible.

you are buffing good players too much.

equally doesnt mean the same buff it means the impact the buff has.

FGRA 69 to 70 is stronger than all the other buffs even though its only 1 rating. if all these buffs happened players who have a good inside:outside ratio gain significantly more than 3-10, MID, COR, and ATB players.

The effect this will have is the weaker 3-10, MID, COR, and ATB players who are getting minutes will get pushed out for more inside play.

Please suggest something, then, Silo, so we can progress with the ideas and put together something everyone will be up to!!

[Silogical]

Please suggest something, then, Silo, so we can progress with the ideas and put together something everyone will be up to!!

First we have to find out what the league wants. Does the league want a 0-3 and 3P league like the NBA or a more blanced league.

Lets say the league wants better efficiency, more guards/wings that can get inside and score, more volume 3's, better mid range, better 3-10

The solution is simple start creating players that push the league in those directions.

A slashing guard that can get inside and score there but also has weak defense. This player pushes the league in the direction of "better efficiency" and "more guards/wings that can get inside and score"

If we keep creating inefficient players with strong defense then that is the league we are going to have. Likewise if we only created strong offensive players with no D we would be having this same discussion except we'd be talking about nerfing these shooting ratings or buffing defensive ratings.

It wont take drastic changes in player creation to shift the league, small changes over time will shift the league.

[Marcos_Beck]

That’s why I’m trying to create a standard for Kyrus and Andrei to work on next draft classes.
My idea was to mirror NBA but with way less efficiency at the rim, and more efficiency from the mid range, to make it viable as well.

But it can be adjusted to any kind of league we want. It’s just tinkering with the standards and then buffing current players accordingly as well.

But please give me a concrete idea, I plan on making a pool with few adjustment options so GMs can vote what we should do moving forward.

[TheTwoWallaces]

My concern with all this is how much does our data come from us misusing tactics/players? Wouldn't all this data change if GMs just used their players differently? For all we know, a bunch of coaches are sabotaging their FG_RA because they are forcing the ball inside way too much. Or players are instructed to drive/shoot when they should just be posting or pulling up.

As far as I can tell, it's possible to get a player with a FG_RA of 45 to shoot 50%+ from the rim if he is playing in a good system and has good IQ, consistency, etc.

I'm not sure I like blanket buffs as much as I like just having GMs think more strategically about how to use their players. But I don't know, a lot of this analysis is interesting but over my head.

[TheTwoWallaces]

For reference, look at Nassir Little. He's a career 40% FG shooter, including now in Toronto. But his one season in Detroit he shot 46% because he was used in a different system and with different players (mainly Snail Magic).

But maybe I'm missing the entire point of this discussion

[Silogical]

That’s why I’m trying to create a standard for Kyrus and Andrei to work on next draft classes.
My idea was to mirror NBA but with way less efficiency at the rim, and more efficiency from the mid range, to make it viable as well.

But it can be adjusted to any kind of league we want. It’s just tinkering with the standards and then buffing current players accordingly as well.

But please give me a concrete idea, I plan on making a pool with few adjustment options so GMs can vote what we should do moving forward.

The two options would be

1) Globally change all shooting ratings with FGRA getting a bigger buff so FGRA players end up stronger compared to non FGRA players.

2) Work with the draft team to slowly altar how players are created to fairly shift the league to the exact same spot as option 1

To slowly shift the league, created players would get slightly higher:
RIM_Rate
DUNK_Rate
FGRA
FGI
MID
(+SCR -PASS PREF on 3 pt shooters in the range of 35-39)

To balance they would get slightly lower
DEF
BLK
STL
DI
IQ

Its a double sided attack, the slight increase in shooting increases efficiency and the slightly lower defense increase efficiency.

[Marcos_Beck]

Silo

I think you are missing a key point of all these angles
Players won’t get nerfed anyway so a 69 FGRA player will ALWAYS be dominant.
Those changes are meant to make players with current 45 FGRA to at least be useful there. But the reality is they will still suck from RA and will be well below average so even with massive buffs they shouldn’t be trusted to drive to the rim because that’s not a strength of their game

A player with 69 or 70 FGRA is equally dominant, but if the problem is not buffing top players, we can adjust it to only buff players until league average or slightly over it, so it really helps the guys who need it. But the league is already about a few players who dominate inside and will continue this way because they won’t get nerfed. This is just a compensation for more players to look at least useful there as well.

I’m talking about inside play but same goes for 3s, mid range, you name it. We can keep buffs up to the league average but players who are good will continue to dominate no matter what.

I wouldn’t focus on players not receiving a +1 from 69 to 70 (they will be dominant no matter what) but instead focus on getting players from 45 to 53 so they are at least useful in this new engine lol. But if the problem is buffing good players too much, it can easily be adjusted, that’s why I’m asking for concrete suggestions.