Tier - Ranking players
Not sure if this has ever been discussed here but ill present it anyways.
What do you guys think if the NBA came up with a ranking of the players? LIke Tier 1, Tier 2, etc etc.
This way, players can be ranked by skill and performance and placed in a certain salary range. Im thinking one advantage would be fair trades, next would be fair salaries.
Would this be feasible in the NBA?
Like Socialism, as an idea it sounds perfect.tbihis wrote:
But in execution, I'm just not sure it would work.
How do you choose which "Tier" a player falls into? Is it based on Stats? Minutes? Opinion? Ego?
There is no, completely non-subjective way of doing that,and that will just cause some guys and their agents to argue they deserve to be in next 'tier'. Unless there is a completely objective methodology to ranking the Tiers, then it will still cause Headaches for all involved.
“I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.”
― Oscar Wilde
really just a Tier 7 suggestion
Would it be possible to base it on stats?
Like in a typical work environment, youre actually ranked based on output and quality of work.
So as an NBA player, if you produce more stats, the higher your ranking is. I dont think players will become ballhogs coz at the current system, they can actually already do that, but its seldom you see a third stringer opting to take the last shot instead of getting the ball to a Kobe or Durant.
Of course there also needs to be a hardcap so that no one team cant sign 10 Tier 1 players.
It would also be good coz a team would be paying for results rather than potential.
But you are right, it could be tricky and hard to implement. But what im already seeing is basically an invisible ranking anyways, i dont think Derek Fisher's agent will demand the same salary as Kobe's eventhough theyre in the same draft class...so i guess there is somewhat already an unwritten rule, sort of "know your place" and implementing a Tier would just formalize it.
hater, hehehe
Just to add, there would be a different Tier for rookies and players who have come back from long layoff due to injuries.
Also, players wont be able to take less money just to join a contender, coz they are placed in a specific salary range that they cant control, unless they play crappy intentionally for the duration of their contract.
hhhmmm, this is starting to sound communistic! hahaha
Last edited by TheGloveinRapsUniform; Wed Sep 28th, 2011 at 04:39 PM.
If you think stat stuffing is an issue in contract years now, wait till this happens....
Not to mention the nightmare involved in assigining values to rebounds, points , steals, charges - vs minutes played....and which stats are more valuable than the rest...
I dont think using advanced metrics of any sort ie. Wins Produced would help either.
In principal a good idea, execution near impossible me thinks.
I think stat stuffing should have been an issue by now since the current structure is more of an open market, and the more you stat stuff the more youre going to get benched
I think the PER would be a valuable tool, i dont think its perfect at this stage, but it could probably be tinkered
it probably would be near impossible, it would take a complete overhaul but it sounds nice, hehehe
the only way it would work is if you had an accurate metric that everyone agreed to use. If such a metric existed you probably wouldn't need a tier system anyway. So it's kind of a catch-22.
"We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon
The problem with attempting to use stats is that it doesn't take into account intangibles. How would you adequately rank a defensive stopper that has weak stats? How would you adequately rank a "glue guy" whose stat make him seem far less valuable than he really is (ie: Shane Battier)? I think this is all just far too subjective and unlikely. Would you pay a 32 year old tier-1 player the same on a 5-year deal that you would pay a 25 year old tier-1 player? How do you properly evaluate contribution to the team in the dressing room? Or to the franchise or the community? Communism doesn't work. Unfortunately. lol
The only other situation I can think of like this in Pro Sports, is in Baseball with the Compensatory Picks if you lose a Free Agent.
The way it works in MLB is: if you sign a Free Agent in the Off Season, he is catergorized as either a "Class-A", "Class-B" and "Everyone else" Free Agent.
Depending on the Class of Player, the team signing that player may be forced to give their First Round pick to the team losing that Player (Class-A), or simply the Team Losing a Player gets an extra Draft Pick in the "Sandwich Round" (Class-B).
The way they determine the 'Class' of a Player is by determining whether or not they are in the Top 20% of their respective Position (Class-A), or outside of the Top 20%, but still in the Top 40% (Class-B).
However, and this is where it gets murky, the way they are ranked by position is by using their "Rating Score" which is essentially calculated using all sorts of Baseball Metrics (Go here for full explanation if you like. This is the ONLY way I could see it being done). These are generally Very Advanced Stats, and if you read the break down, they are almost invented solely for the purpose of rating the players. Basketball would have to do the same.
The other thing you have to consider with these 'tiers' is whether or not a guy IS part of that tier or just had a "contract year".
In baseball, some of the ratings take into consideration consistency over a stretch of up to 3 years.
Again, this is something that would be crucial to having a fairly Tiered system.
And this is where the system right now is broken. You get the Eric Dampiers, the Yogi Stewarts and Eddy Curry's.
Baseball it doesn't matter if one guy tries to put up unbelievable stats. Generally it will ONLY help the team. (See 'Steroid Era')
In basketball, if it were just the Basic boxscore stats, it would almost certainly work to the opposite effect, and have a very detrimental outcome on the team and players.
I don't know if you have been following the ESPN #NBArank or the 2k Sports Ratings, but these guys' Ego is about as Fragile as a piece of wet paper.
Last edited by joey_hesketh; Wed Sep 28th, 2011 at 06:54 PM.
“I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.”
― Oscar Wilde
COntracts currently aren't based on stats. A guy can be a great role player, but not put up great stats, but still make a lot of money because teams know he's valuable. If you start tiering players, then intangibles are completely disregarded. Guys who don't care about stats get punished while players who do get rewarded. That's not a good thing, in my opinion.
Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
Follow me on Twitter.
some mediocre players on crap teams put up some nice numbers--should they get paid more than a really good player on a contending team? Contenders typically have several good players with lowered stats, but the sum is greater than the parts.
Agreed.
Hollinger already has many detailed pieces on PER rankings.
Speaking of ratings/rankings Derozan got a 69 in 2k12!
I'm not so sure about that... they are just not dependent on stats, and are much less dependent than this idea would make them.
But there is no question in my mind that if players were payed on what stat tier they were in, they'd set their goals on that next tier and #s would become priority over winning.
Pretty much the same as what i was thinking. Players will be ranked and grouped. You'll have the Kobes (Tier 1), The Aldridges (Tier 2), The Noahs (Tier 3) etc etc.
I think 3 years would be a good length of contract. They would have enough time to prove themselves, and enough time for the coaches/league to evaluate them. Even if they have a contract year, they will still be evaluated based on the whole 3 years.
Exactly. With a Tier, you can avoid the Dampiers, Currys etc. Even lets say they put in a good 2 years out of the 3 and get to the next tier and get a good contract for another 3 years, if theyre crappy for those next 3 years, they can always get sent back to the lower level tier. A demotion, in office terms. And i think this should be widely acceptable. Unlike with the current system, players get signed for 6 years, plays 2 good years and the 3rd is a total bust, then the team gets stuck.
Im really not worried about the stats stuffing, like i said, with the current system, what preventing them to stuff their stats? We all know, even if we dont admit it, stats run the NBA. The top 20 highest paid players in the NBA all average at least 20pts a game. Or close to double digit rebounds and assists. I know defense is valuable in the NBA, but defenders dont make as much as the good offensive players. Why is Battier, Artest, brewer, collison, noah not making the same as kobe, lebron, howard and paul? Im not saying kobe, howard and lebron are not good defenders, but they are good offensive players at the same time, and thats what gets them the big bucks, IMO.
If there was a Tier, there would be minimal lopsided trades, no burdensome contracts and definitely better competition among teams.
The problem is that offensive players will make more than defensive players. And Kobe makes more than Battier because he's a better player. Kobe plays both ends of the court at a very high level. A guy like Monta Ellis has elite OFFENSIVE stats, but he's a poor defender. And that's why a lot of people think he's probably overpaid, despite his offensive output.
I think the league already puts way too much emphasis on what stats a player gets. Doing this tier thing would only make it worse. I care whether a player can win, not how much he scores. Unlike in baseball, stats don't tell the whole truth. And that's because players take on different roles depending on what their team needs. Let's not punish players for them playing roles their team needs them to play.
Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
Follow me on Twitter.
This is a fantastic point Tim.
Like I said, unless they invented a stat that was all uncompassing in term of what a player means to his team, then there's no way to this do this fairly and without further damaging an already clearly broken system.
“I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.”
― Oscar Wilde
For defense, is it possible to use Points Against? steals? blocks? turnovers? Im just thinking...i really want to make this system work! hahaha.
If there was a way to keep track of defensive effort and make it a part of the Tier, wouldnt it encourage so-called lazy defenders (i dont believe there are players who are really defense-incapable) to put extra effort to defend so it would help them get to the next Tier? Much the same as those guys who wants to score more points? And for defenders like Battier and Artest, wouldnt it encourage them to not pass up on open shots or maybe create a scoring opportunity for themselves rather than watch offensive players do so?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote