We love naming things around here in the spirit of logical fallacies or TV tropes. At some point, I'll probably figure out a way to consolidate them all. Today I'd like a few more that regularly come up on the Boxscore Geeks show to the collection.

The 2K Problem

I cite this one a lot and use it in two ways. The first is in describing players. In NBA 2K there might be a player with a high rating that seems outrageous, Carmelo Anthony, for instance. But, here's the thing, in NBA 2K, you are allowed to control the player. You can make the player stop doing all the bad things they do, such as taking midrange jumpers. You can force them to cheat less on defense. And I feel people do that a lot when assessing players. IF that player played better, they'd be great. They have all the talent, right?

The second way is in regards to front offices. A front office has a mediocre team. But all they need to do is sign a reasonable small forward, trade away that overrated star, and draft a few underrated gems. Again, in NBA 2K you control the franchise and can do this. However, the front office of your squad? They're just going to give their overrated chucker a max deal. They'll draft for need. They won't pick up the right small forward.

The crux of the NBA 2K problem is the major inconsistencies of what a player/team COULD do and what they actually do. And, what's more, I feel many people have "videogamish" imaginations in regards to what players/teams are capable of.

The Sports Center Problem

Someone tells you a player is clutch. Or they say a player can score at will. And when you do your geeky diligence and actually check the numbers you find out the player isn't clutch. Or you notice the player's shooting numbers are average. What gives? Well, in the cable sports era, top 10 playlists have become the norm. Add in YouTube and clips showing amazing plays are readily available. When we see a play of Kobe sinking a clutch game winner, we think that's the norm. In large part, because we'll see that clip over and over again. This fits in perfectly with the "Availability Heuristic." Because we've seen the play so often it comes to mind more easily to mind when we think of the player. And because of that, we overrate players that have the occasional great play. After all, an NBA game is around 200 possessions, and a fantastic play can be worth at most 4 points.

The LaMarcus Aldridge Perception Problem

I may rename this one. That said, it relates to the Sports Center Problem. A few seasons ago in Portland Aldridge, according to our numbers, was a below average player. Of course, that season if you told that to a mainstream fan, they'd think you were crazy. That's because Aldridge put up some legitimately sick games. He had multiple twenty plus rebound games. He had some thirty plus points games too. Of course, he had a ton horrible games too. After all, as his season True Shooting was 50.7% (which is dreadful for a big) then for every great game, he had to have some bad games to "make up for it."

But just like the Sports Center problem, the great games come to mind easier. "How can you think Aldridge is bad? He just put up a 31-25 game!" However, the stinker where Aldridge missed over ten shots and didn't crack ten rebounds barely make a dent. It got even worse in Aldridge's case as he was on a good team, meaning it was easier to forget his bad games.

---

When I bring this up in future articles or on the Boxscore Geeks show, you'll know what I'm talking about. Let us know if there are any more we should add, and we'll seeya next time.