Latest Entries »

As I said in my previous posting, I think that, when we compare two players to each other, we often use criteria that are too limited.

Before really getting into the discussion about how to compare players, I think it makes sense to frame the discussion.

As I see it, there are 4 tiers of players in the NBA. For lack of better descriptions, I call them:
1. The Superstars
2. The Stars
3. The Guys Who Are Above Average , and
4. The Average / Below Average Guys.

These labels, I acknowledge, are not particularly creative. But I think they do the trick.

As for the Superstars,by definition, there can only a handful in the league at a time. 10 or fewer. In today’s game, the group is Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Carmelo, and possibly Dwight Howard, Dirk, and CP3 (as of two years ago, Tim Duncan was unquestionably among the superstars).

The Stars is a larger group than the Superstars, but still very small. At any moment, it includes 10-15 guys. In today’s game, it includes, among others, KG, Pierce, Joe Johnson, Brandon Roy, Chauncey, Duncan, Parker, and Nash.

The Guys Who Are Above Average is a much larger group. It includes guys who would make an average team better by about 5-10 wins per year. This group includes some guys who are solid all-around players, but not spectacular (See: Shane Battier and, come to think of it, just about all of his teammates on the Rockets), and it includes some role players who are so good at what they do that they bring their team a few extra wins per year (See: The Birdman and Joakim Noah).

It’s very important to identify guys in this group correctly. If a team mistakes one of them for a star, it could sign one of them to be a team leader, and then wind up with a mediocre team. (See: Toronto Raptors / Hedo Turkoglu; Detroit Pistons / Ben Gordon; Golden State Warriors / Corey Maggette). But, if you wind up with one of these guys as your third or fourth best player, you could be an excellent team. (See: Los Angeles Lakers / Lamar Odom; Orlando Magic / Rashard Lewis).

Then there are the average / below average guys. These guys constitute about 50-60 percent of the guys in the league. They run the gamut from, on one hand, guys who have trouble hanging onto a roster spot, to, on the other hand, guys who can play 12-24 minutes per game for a quality team. (See: The New York Knicks, aside from David Lee, who cover the spectrum from guys who barely belong in the league to guys who shouldn’t be playing more than 24 minutes on any team that is really trying to be good.)

The next posting, coming shortly, will discuss measurements to use to determine which category a player belongs in.

Leave a Comment:

Have you noticed that whenever hoops fans compare two superstar players to each other, they wind up talking about the players’ teammates and championship rings without talking about the actual players? I’ve had the conversation so frequently that I can almost predict the back-and-forth.

For example, consider the debate about who is better between Kobe and LeBron. That debate has become so predictable that I can have it with myself:

Self: LeBron is better. He’s bigger, faster, and stronger. He’s a better rebounder and a better passer.
Self: No, Kobe is better. He’s a more versatile scorer, he’s clutch, and he has four rings.
Self: He only has four rings because he played with Shaq for three of those seasons, and had a stacked team for the fourth.
Self: Actually, he proved himself to be incredibly clutch even when he had Shaq. And last year he was the clear team leader. It’s true that his teammates are good, but LeBron’s aren’t bad, either. Mo Williams was an All-Star last year, and the Cavs were the best defensive team in the league.
Self: Are you being serious? You think the Cavs’ supporting cast is better than the Lakers’?

At this point, I’m 90 seconds into a conversation with myself about Kobe and LeBron, and I’m not even talking about Kobe or LeBron.

This is a problem for a few reasons. One of those reasons is that I shouldn’t talk to myself for 90 seconds. Or any seconds, actually. But I’ll look beyond that for now, and focus on the basketball-related component of the problem…

The conventional way of measuring the merits of one player versus another is too limited. Over the next few days / weeks, I’ll be sharing some thoughts about a better way to measure excellence.

Leave a Comment: