This is a very touchy subject among nba guru's and it sure will stir up some debate and controversies, however, being the statistical nut that I am, I've done my best to determine the top 200 NBA Players as we speak right now for 2009/2010 NBA Season.
Some of the consideration that went into the rankings included the NBA.com's Efficiency/48 minute Rating. There's always an argument about who the best players are and what order they sould be. For the 2009/2010 NBA Season, here is a breakdown by position for this category:
Efficiency/48 minute Rating does not = total impact on the game. It only tracks statistics. I've seen someone with 15,5,5 have a bigger impact on a game than someone with 25,7,7. Kobe as the 5th best player automatically makes this a joke. <!-- Session data-->
Here is the definition of Efficiency from NBA.com:
How do many NBA coaches quickly evaluate a player's game performance? They check his efficiency.
NBA.com evaluates all players based on the efficiency formula: ((Points + Rebounds + Assists + Steals + Blocks) - ((Field Goals Att. - Field Goals Made) + (Free Throws Att. - Free Throws Made) + Turnovers)).
It's hard to argue with who is at the top of the lists at each position: Chris Paul, Steve Nash, Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, Pau Gasol, Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan, Greg Oden, and Dwight Howard. Those are some if not most of the best players in the nba. The formula is very accurate, and look at the guys rated right behind those players: Brandon Jennings, Rajon Rondo, Tony Parker, Kevin Martin, Manu Ginobili, Danny Granger, Kevin Durant, Paul Pierce, David Lee, Carlos Boozer, Andrew Bynum, Al Horford, Joakim Noah, etc.
This really does allow coaches to see who is performing at the highest level on the court. Let's take a closer look at some of the guys rated way down on the list: PG Mike Conley has a rating of only 14.02 which is the worst among all nba starting point guards. Not too far ahead of him is Raymond Felton with a 14.73 rating. Both players are struggling with their teams, and just look at the overall records of each team.
Take a look at Chicago's SG John Salmons. He's playing nearly 38 minutes a game, but with a E/48 of only 14.20, it's no wonder why Chicago is only 6-8, because Salmons is shooting under 35%.
Here were the final leaders in 2008/2009 for Efficiency/48 minutes:
I don't agree with the stats. It answers the questions of what is happening with the players. But the question is doesn't answer is, why? There may be reasons why some players may be more effienct than others particular categories. Bynum may be more effienct with rebounds when Gasol is out of the line-up. Likewise, Garnett may be grab more rebounds also, until sheed steps in. You take 6.9 power forward David Lee and pair him up with Chris Bosh, and Lee's rebounds may go down. My point is, some of the stats are determined by the situations and not just ability of the playes. Ray Allen would be higher if he didn't play with Garnett and Pierce. But most of the players at the top of the list, you could switch them around and come up with the same caliber of play. Thier stats are too close to conclude who is the best. So, like I said, the stats are correct, but conclusion may be who is the most effiennt player in the league, but that's doesn't also make them the best player in the leagues.
Im sorry, but to have no mention of Anthony Randolph, Kelenna Azubuike or Anthony Morrow in your entire list is a crime to me. Not saying they should be high, but they should be on there!
I don't agree with the stats. It answers the questions of what is happening with the players. But the question is doesn't answer is, why? There may be reasons why some players may be more effienct than others particular categories. Bynum may be more effienct with rebounds when Gasol is out of the line-up. Likewise, Garnett may be grab more rebounds also, until sheed steps in. You take 6.9 power forward David Lee and pair him up with Chris Bosh , and Lee's rebounds may go down. My point is, some of the stats are determined by the situations and not just ability of the playes. Ray Allen would be higher if he didn't play with Garnett and Pierce. But most of the players at the top of the list, you could switch them around and come up with the same caliber of play. Thier stats are too close to conclude who is the best. So, like I said, the stats are correct, but conclusion may be who is the most effiennt player in the league, but that's doesn't also make them the best player in the leagues. Exactly. All effieciency rating takes into account is stats. There are so many variables that come into play that it's a very flawed way to conclude who are the best players in the league. It doesn't even truely tell you who is the most efficient. Of course someone like Lebron who has to do everything on offense will get more points/assists than someone like Kobe who has better players around him and doesn't have to do as much. Same with the "big 3" in Boston. When they were teamed up all of their statistics took a hit, but that doesn't mean they all of a sudden were worse players. <!-- Session data-->
Other Warriors that made my list are: #120 SG Anthony Morrow, #125 PF Brandan Wright, and #126 PG Stephen Curry. I think the Warriors players have been givin some big props by me. It's just too bad they have a Hall of Fame coach who doesn't condition his players so they stay healthy, and the fact that he gives more minutes to Mikki Moore and Vlad Radmonovic than he does Biedrins, Randolph and Wright.
Until Nelson stops using his 4 guards at one time run and gun offense, the team will be destined for the lottery year in and year out. Heck if I'm coach of the Warriors, I'd atleast have a clue as to how I distribute the minutes for the team: PG Stephen Curry 28.2 minutes SG Monta Ellis 35.1 minutes SF Kelenna Azubuike 26.9 minutes PF Anthony Randolph 25.2 minutes C Andris Biedrins 32.1 minutes Bench: PG C.J. Watson 9.4 minutes SG Anthony Morrow 26.3 minutes SF Corey Maggette 28.1 minutes PF Brandan Wright 15.4 minutes PF Vlad Radmonovic 0.0 minutes PF/C Mikki Moore 0.0 minutes C Ronny Turiaf 13.3 minutes
Condition the darn team, play the best players, and who knows they could challenge for a playoff-spot.
Brandon Jennings is a top 20 player in the league and he hasn't even played 1/4 of a season!
and the list goes on...
Honestly if you are going to put out the effort to make a list like this you must take a little more time and not just go by their PER 48 minutes stats. This list is horrible.
Yes as of right now David Lee is playing better than Amar'e Stoudemire, therefore he is slightly rated above him. David Lee is a double double machine and is a much better rebounder than Stat will ever be. Sure Amar'e scores at a higher pace and is way more flashy and athletic and exciting, but Lee just quietly goes about his business and puts up big numbers every year.
Charlie V was probaly listed twice due to a change in decision in my final rankings and I just simply forget to delete and move up the other players. Sorry, 200 players is quite a bit.
You ask why Greg Oden and Andrew Bynum are rated so high? Because it's the simple fact when each of those two players are on the floor for their teams, they are having a big impact. Everybody is quick to blast Greg Oden, people were already labeling him as injury-prone and a bust, but the fact is he's one of the nba's best rebounders, shot blockers, and controls the paint about as good as anybody in the nba.
Yao Ming makes my list because year in and year out, all the guy does is score about 20 points and 10 rebounds a game. Sure he's 7'6 and has an advantage over other players, but the fact is he is under contract with the Houston Rockets, I didn't feel like leaving any players off the list due to injury, it's just part of the game.
I'm not that high on Pistons PG Rodney Stuckey, he has some talent, but he's not really a pure point guard. I think this is hurting his numbers. To be truthful, I think he's more of a shooting guard and would put up bigger numbers at that position, but with Ben Gordon and Richard Hamilton at the 2 in Detroit, that will not be happening.
Yes Jennings gets my approval, he's already exploded for 55 points for the Bucks and has earned high praise around the league and people are saying he's going to be the next Allen Iverson. He's really quick and can stroke it from outside. He's probaly among the 10 best point guards in the entire nba and is making a legitimate run for being a top 5 Point Guard.
Crazedrat, why is Battier so damn low? Answer: B/C stats only accumlate offensive numbers and don't take into account that he can step in and take away a teams best perimeter player. Battier is the best defender in the game hands down. He's top 50 all day long.
Rodney Stuckey: 21.6pts 6.5rbs 4.7asts 1.86stls 0.17blks .388fg .240 3pt .865ft Those numbers very much resemble a Larry Hughes type of player, though Stuckey isn't as good of a defender as Hughes is. Stuckey shoots a low percentage from the floor and 3 point line and should be playing Shooting Guard, not point guard.
As for SF Jamario Moon making my list above Stuckey: 14.9pts 10.0rbs 1.4asts 1.00stls 1.20blks .500fg .400 3pt .778ft Sure Moon doesn't score a ton, but he did start for Toronto and Miami last season. He is a good rebounder with above average athletic ability, can steal and block shots as well for you and play above the rim.
Maybe I'll create a seperate thread for Best Defensive NBA Players. Then without question, Shane Battier becomes among the elite. It's just the simple fact that he doesn't ever really provide any offense, whether it's rebounding, passing, or scoring.
Per 48 this year: 13.7pts 4.0rbs 3.8asts 1.49stls 1.10blks .422fg .348 3pt .852ft This suggests if you play Battier 24 minutes, he's giving you: about 7 points 2 rebound and 2asts. Let's be real here, he's strictly a defensive guru just like Spurs SF Bruce Bowen was for several years.
Sure I like Battier and what he brings to the table, but let's be honest here: His offensive output is pretty abysmal, which evens out is superb defense and makes him a very average all around player (Thus this is I why rated him where I did).
Didn't realize Battier's numbers were that low. He's always been about a 13-3-5 guy. Thought he was there again. I think this is a down year for him. As the year goes on, his offense will go up.
And you say that Battiers bad offense evens out his great defense making him average. What does that mean for a player like Jamal Crawford or Flip Murray or to an extent, LeBron James. Guys that are great on offense but absolutely terrible on defense. Why does O > D?
Guys that are great on offense but absolutely terrible on defense. Why does O > D? BucFan34,
Maybe the list should be retitled best offensive players. But then you have to take out deffensive rebounds and steals that don't lead to scores, maybe.
But I can understand defense not being included in the list. Battier is a good defensive player, but Battier is not guarding Kobe or Paul Pierce, or Carmelo every night. Some of the players he goes up against are offensively challenged, so he may not have the same impact on the game. But on offense, Kobe, Paul and Carmelo will bring their same game every night. It's not Battier's fault that some of his opponent don't need to be locked down where he can really show off his skills. And being the lock down defender many times is a wear on your offensive game.
