Summertime in the NBA is full of rankings. Teams, players, coaches, all-time greats, nobody is immune from the dreaded \u201c1-to-x\u201d listing process. The Portland Trail Blazers have not fared too well in leaguewide rankings lately. That\u2019s a cause for concern for one Portland fan whose submission we examine in this bonus edition of the Blazer\u2019s Edge Mailbag.<\/p>\n
Why do [the Blazers] keep getting overlooked in the rankings? I can understand power rankings cuz they probably just go by last season\u2019s results and won\u2019t change anything big without a big trade or something. But our players are better than they get credit for. Even the younger players seem to get ranked lower than young players from other teams even though some of those players were drafted lower or don\u2019t have the same stats. Is it just lack of visibility or do you think we get shafted by the national media?<\/p>\n
Sure, visibility has something to do with it. The Blazers are remoted, tucked in a corner of the league and the country. When Damian Lillard transcended into the national consciousness he rose above some of that, but at least among more causal media\u2013read: non super-nerds\u2013that\u2019s what it takes.<\/p>\n
But you also have to understand the point of rankings. It\u2019s 5% serious, 95% a fun exercise to generate discussion. Coming up with the perfect list would be a tragedy! Nobody would have anything to say about it other than, \u201cYup. Agree.\u201d The interesting part as the person crafting those rankings is to weigh different options and make a choice based on whatever formula you crafted. May be right, may be wrong, but it\u2019s still challenging and bound to evoke the opinions of others who judge differently than you.<\/p>\n
Rankings do have some value, but only when zoomed out. It\u2019s completely accurate to say that LeBron James is far better than most of the 12th men in the league, as most starters will be. But you didn\u2019t need a list to tell you that. The finer details provide the amusement and brain exercise, but this is exactly where rankings start to fall apart.<\/p>\n
Casual, fan definitions of the word \u201cbetter\u201d have been overwhelmed in a sea of trade machines, draft simulators, and 2K ratings. One player might be an 89, another an 83, and clearly you want the first, right?<\/p>\n
I am nowhere near the proficiency level of a professional scout. But even I can point out the flaws in that omnibus approach. It only takes four words: Better at what, exactly?<\/p>\n
If you look at the Trail Blazers roster currently, I\u2019m comfortable in saying that the last thing they need is another ball-dominant player. Scoot Henderson, Deni Avdija, Jrue Holiday (sometimes), Damian Lillard (eventually), and maybe Yang Hansen all operate pretty well with the rock in their hands. The more you take it away from them, the less they\u2019re playing to their strengths and the less effective they will get.<\/p>\n
So let\u2019s say we\u2019re looking for a reserve guard for the Blazers, especially knowing Lillard is injured for at least a year. The name Russell Westbrook pops up. He\u2019s nowhere near the level of his prime, but his scoring numbers are still good, his assist totals are great, he\u2019s got experience, he\u2019s been a former MVP, and he even received votes for Sixth Man of the Year last year. Overall he\u2019d rank a lot higher than an average G League player.<\/p>\n
But damn, when it comes to the current Blazers, I think I\u2019d rather have the G League guy. That\u2019s not an insult to Westbrook. I just suspect his play style, his lack of three-point shooting, and generally being set in his ways would break Portland\u2019s offense, concentrating it even further inside and taking away opportunities from the teammates mentioned above. At least the G League guy wouldn\u2019t upset the apple cart. In comparison to the league, Westbrook might be the Xth best reserve point guard out there. For Portland, he would be near the bottom of the list.<\/p>\n
That\u2019s just a lazy example. The aforementioned scouts will get granular enough to make your head spin. Does this player catch and shoot or fire off the dribble? From what areas of the floor is he most effective? Is he a one-footed or two-footed jumper? What\u2019s his wingspan? Does he make one play, zero plays, or multiple efforts on defense? How good is he going right and left on each end of the floor? I can\u2019t even begin to approach the level of detail professionals assess.<\/p>\n
Each one of those answers, compared to team structure and needs, will determine how high a player \u201cranks\u201d for your franchise. Answers may vary. Wildly.<\/p>\n
If we go down a leaguewide ranking list, of course you\u2019d see most teams selecting the highest players before the lowest. But when you start narrowing down to plus or minus 30 players\u2013maybe even more\u2013the difference between them is going to depend on a whole lot of factors that nobody is accounting for, factors that can\u2019t be accounted for with that big of a lens.<\/p>\n
In short, I\u2019d take the rankings for what they\u2019re worth\u2013entertainment and discussion\u2013while realizing that the Blazers need to get the best players for them and not just the highest-ranked players overall. Aside from the obligatory admission that Portland still needs a true #1 option of the kind that usually dominates such rankings, I don\u2019t think Joe Cronin and company are losing too much sleep over what media folks think of Portland players. Fans probably shouldn\u2019t either.<\/p>\n
Thanks for the question! You can always send yours to blazersub@gmail.com<\/a> and we\u2019ll try to answer as many as possible!<\/p>\n