Three days ago, a beam of sunshine burst itself into the otherwise gloomy life of your average NBA fan. For a brief moment, the clouds parted, birds everywhere began to sing John Lennon’s “Imagine” in symphonic harmony, and the world was quiet, like a dimly lit living room on a sleepy Christmas morning. NBA 2K12 was released.
As more and more people have dove into the experience in recent years, the game has taken on a life of its own, stirring incessant, and somewhat meaningless, debate with routinely unjust team and player rankings. So powerful they are, in fact, that in the past, after playing previous versions of the game for hours on end, I’d step away with the following revelations: “That Josh Smith is really something—can’t wait to attend his Hall of Fame after party!” and “I didn’t know Peja Stojakovic was taller than Zydrunas Ilgauskas?!”
Sometimes the game absorbs whoever’s playing, brainwashing them into believing what’s set as a ranking is indisputably correct. Other times, not so much. The big controversy in this year’s edition surrounds Dirk Nowitzki’s measly overall grade of 85, placing him below the likes of Amar’e Stoudemire, Pau Gasol, and Rudy Gay, and tying him with Blake Griffin. (What?)
These are rankings in a video game, so their effect on actual reality is microscopic, but what it does signify is common perception. The rankings are calculated in an attempt to reflect the league in the most accurate way possible. Apart from pin pointing DeMarcus Cousins’ headband at a picture perfect angle, or exacting the precise trajectory in which spittle flies from Kevin Garnett’s bottom lip, the best way to do this is by making team and player rankings as close to correct as can possibly be done. People who buy and play this game expect authenticity to a tee. The game’s designers try their hardest to make their product a direct semblance of what the gamer is watching on TV once the X-Box goes off and they’ve beaten Miami (on easy) for the 59th straight time.
NBA 2K12 (and sports games in general) was created to give the fan a semi-analogous feeling towards the on-court life of a professional athlete. What’s it like to bend your knees, soar towards the basket, and put your elbow through a rim?
By making the graphics and intelligence as exact as humanly possible, that dunking sensation becomes all the more real. You’re still light years away from accomplishing something meaningful, but still, you’re closer.
The rankings for Houston aren’t the best, and in this case, the stats and facts presented aren’t used correctly. Both player and team rankings say something about the way those who created the game believe the basketball world views the team; the results aren’t favorable.
Here are the basic grades 2K12 assigned to Houston:
Overall: 19th
Offense: 16th
Defense: 22nd
To say the Rockets are the 19th best team in the league is a tad skewed. They finished with a record of 43-39 (for those counting at home, that’s a winning record that finished dead last in the Southwest Division), better than the 16th ranked Sixers and 18th ranked Knicks. It’s not bloody murder, but one or two spots higher would be pleasant.
The defensive ranking is appropriate enough: The Rockets allowed their opponents to shoot 46.8% from the field, good for a photo finish tie with Minnesota for ninth highest in the league; they allowed opponents to grab 3507 rebounds in 82 games (only six teams allowed more); on average, about 104 points were scored against them in every game, placing them four points over the league average (and nearly six points higher than the Charlotte Bobcats); and they forced 1125 turnovers, translating to the 21st worst mark league-wide. They played the whole season with a seriously undersized front line, lacking a rim protector, and their offensive style afforded quick shots (in the process inflating possessions and defensive numbers), so, again, the defensive ranking of 22nd is more than fair.
Offensively—and this translates to the player rankings we’ll get into in a second—there’s a big problem. The Rockets finished fourth overall in offensive rating and third in points per game. Their offensive was expansive, with myriad of dangerous weaponry. They got to the line (seventh in attempts, fourth in percentage), shot the three-ball (fourth in attempts, ninth in percentage), and could adapt to almost any defensive game plan thrown their way. The numbers say Houston had a top 10 offense, but recognitions come hard with no super sexy All-Stars on the roster.
Speaking of the super sexy, Kevin Martin was ranked 79; Kyle Lowry, 76; and Luis Scola, 77. About one week ago, Dime Magazine put together an unofficial system as to how one should read these numbers:
50-59: you were an end-of-bench filler, a journeyman
90-99: the very best players in the league
60-69: you were an average role player, someone who got 5-15 minutes a night
70-79: you were an important role player, a good starter, but not great or All-Star worthy
80-89: you were a star, could sometimes be an All-Star
Kevin Martin’s ability to draw fouls and shoot with remarkable accuracy doesn’t make his jersey a top seller, but his numbers are certainly worthy of All-Star consideration. He’s 79. Michael Beasley is 82. This is corruption.
Scola didn’t make the All-Star team because he’s a forward in the Western Conference, and if your name isn’t Tim Duncan or Dirk Nowitzki, good luck with that. Heading into 2011-12, Lowry is a front runner for Most Improved Player, and where he ends up is anybody’s guess.
The Houston Rockets didn’t make the playoffs last season, so to compose an argument that they’ve been unfairly disrespected by the NBA 2K12’s angelic programmers wouldn’t be right. It’s nit picking, hemming and hawing. But what are we talking about in the first place? The topic of conversation, how one’s team is rated in a really popular video game, is so inconsequential when we boil it down, that this entire article seems a bit silly.
That being said, here’s hoping Chase Budinger graces next year’s cover.
