The National Basketball Association’s 2017-18 season must be drawing near. It must be September and the rosters must be nearly set. There’s simply not much newsworthy going on, not even trade rumors. To save the day, for the seventh straight year, ESPN’s NBA Player Rankings from 1-100 is once again creating a stir for basketball fans and players.
Bruised Egos, Chips on Shoulders
The rankings have predictably attracted a lot of attention and bruised some egos, though there’s no clear method.
Several NBA players – including one with a Journalism degree who questioned the process and suggested a ranking system for journalists – have voiced their displeasure with the rankings on social media.
One player, unhappy with his ranking, vowed to play next season with “a chip on his shoulder” which likely means he’ll just shoot more.
A few weeks ago, we witnessed a similar uproar regarding player ratings on a video game.
Funny, but there didn’t seem to be this much angst over Strat-O-Matic ratings back in the day.
Team Sport, Individual Rankings
Individual rankings in a team sport will never be fair.
What are the criteria for grading these players, anyway?
If, as stated, the bases includes the “quality and quantity of each player’s contribution to his team’s ability to win games” then how is that even determined? They are essentially using team outcomes to generate individual ratings. What if the player doesn’t have quality teammates (not using the term “supporting cast”)? What if his team gets outcoached every night? What if the team is hit with an injury bug? What if he has several highly-ranked teammates who just aren’t compatible?
Or what if he and his teammates – perish the thought – can’t shoot threes?
If a good player suits up for a lousy team one year, then moves on to a better team the following year and his individual stats suffer a bit, did he get better because his team won more, or did he get worse because his individual numbers went down?
In boxing, golf, tennis, track and field or any other individual competition, any contested rankings can be easily settled. It becomes a lot trickier when there are so many variables involved.
One can also wonder if, for example, the player ranked # 99 will have that used against him during some in-game trash talk.
Rookies Are Ranked, Too
Rookies should not be ranked. While we might disagree with a player taking these ratings to heart, one can certainly understand how a 15-year veteran might feel slighted at the idea of being ranked below a guy who has never stepped on an NBA court.
Besides, how can a rookie’s contribution to winning be measured when he hasn’t played an NBA game or season yet?
A Clear, Yet Fuzzy Line Exists
As in most team sports, there is a measurable drop-off between the league’s top stars – say, the perennial All-Stars – and the rest of the players, and it’s always been that way. But even among the league’s best 15-20 players – even though there’s a consensus number one and has been for several years – there’s very little that separates them as well because each brings something different to the table.
Determining whether Stephen Curry is significantly more important to the Golden State Warriors than Klay Thompson is tough. Curry is the better ballhandler and Thompson is the better defender, while both shoot the lights out.
Now if someone approaches and wants to argue that Jon Koncak was better than Hakeem Olajuwon back in the 1990’s, then it’s time to change the subject to a potential doctor’s visit.
Once you get past the first handful of players, the rankings really becomes arbitrary. At a certain point you can toss the names in a hat; the difference between the players as you get further down the list is negligible.
Lebron James continues to be the clear top player, even if ESPN decides to go in another direction. He’s the only one who – in a another fruitless exercise – constantly draws comparisons to players from other eras, and there’s still no one else in the league who can carry a team on his back the way he does while making an impact on both ends of the court. He’ll hold onto the top spot for another couple of years as he approaches his mid-thirties.
Once again, based on the reaction the rankings have accomplished several things: folks are talking about basketball out-of-season, spirited debates are taking place on talk shows and around water coolers, and some dead news space gets filled until the players report to training camp in a couple of weeks.
And who knows, maybe some players who don’t normally do so might assume a defensive stance – at least for the first week of the season – in an attempt to improve their individual standing.
It’s really not that serious.
Maybe next season, Opening Night should be moved up to the first week in August.
