↓ Login/Logout ↓
↓ Roster ↓
↓ Archives ↓
↓ About ↓

Befuddling Rodney Stuckey highest-ranked Pistons’ bench player in #NBArank

We’ve gotten to the point with Rodney Stuckey where reason goes out the window.

“He’s a talented player,” and “he can get to the basket and his jumper is improving,” or “he has potential to be a really good defender” — it’s a broken record that’s been playing for six seasons.  Stuckey debuted in ESPN’s #NBArank on Monday at No. 173, down from No. 103 last season.

Last season was probably one that Stuckey would like to forget. He was really never a factor for the Pistons at all. Not to mention he opened the season shooting a horrific 8-for-46 (17 percent) in the team’s first five games, and from there things improved slightly, I suppose.

Big thing was that he never had a role. Stuckey started at shooting guard, fading to the bench and returned to the rotation in a number of roles. For the majority of the season, he was a corner 3-point shooter who couldn’t shoot corner 3-pointers. It was bad.

But after an offseason where he was rumored to be on the trading block, but also strangely lauded by new head coach Maurice Cheeks, perhaps he rebounds.

It wouldn’t be hard considering how poorly he played last season. There’s incentive for Stuckey to play well himself; he’s in a contract season. There’s incentive from the Pistons as well. If he plays well and helps them, great. If he plays well and ends up fetching something decent in a trade, that’s great, too.

Look at the bright side, if Stuckey the player isn’t valuable this season, at least the “Expiring Contract of Rodney Stuckey” may have some value?


  • Sep 30, 20135:29 pm
    by deusXango


    Hasn’t it been a “no-no” to sign players who only play decent ball in a contract year? Up to this point Rodney Stuckey hasn’t played up to the last contract he signed with our Pistons; he’s been turned down in a trade scenario, and him being “engaged” won’t automatically give him a mid-range game, or make him proficient from 3pt range. He’s the leading candidate for starting SG? Oh boy!! 

    • Sep 30, 20139:12 pm
      by Brady Fredericksen


      I disagree there. I’m honestly not sure a starting five of Jennings-Stuckey-Smith-Monroe-Drummond is capable of functioning as an effective opening lineup. There’s no spacing, four guys who NEED the paint and teams will cram the paint.

      Of all the lineups that can really put the Pistons’ into the spacing bind that people talk about, this is probably the one.

      • Sep 30, 20139:39 pm
        by Max


        I think you’re probably right but they might form one of the toughest teams in the league to stay out of foul trouble against.   I’m hoping KCP proves ready enough to start.  

  • Sep 30, 20136:24 pm
    by picknroll


    I am hoping he is gone by the trade deadline!

    • Sep 30, 20137:54 pm
      by JOB


      Salmons, Thornton, AA, Amir, Bass, Wilson Chandler are prob on the radar. (those are some guys w 2 years an 6-8mil/yr, which might create some incentive for trade). Don’t love Salmons but he plays 2 and 3 which we need and seems to be a team guy.

  • Sep 30, 20139:41 pm
    by RyanK


    On a team that needs spacing, I think The Pope and Billups have the nod at two guard before Stuckey gets to play.  Singler has played there also and opens things up for Smith, Monroe, and Drummond to operate.  In an offense that’s focused on those guys how do you play Stuckey who looks for his own shot at a less efficient rate.

    Stuckey is a good player if he’s used the right way.  The problem is he needs to dominate the ball to make things happen and the team is better if the offensive focus is elsewhere.

    • Sep 30, 20139:54 pm
      by Max


      Well, there is certainly room for more than one ball handler on the floor at one time and Stuckey takes care of the ball as well as nearly anyone and passes decently.  Who other than Stuckey is capable of driving and kicking to Jennings for open threes?  

      • Sep 30, 201310:15 pm
        by tarsier


        Smith, Bynum, yeah that’s about it.

        • Oct 1, 201312:39 am
          by Max


          Bynum won’t play with Jennings in all likelihood.  

          • Oct 1, 201310:08 am
            by tarsier

            Quite possibly true. But he could play with Billups, Pope, or Datome which would have the same effect.

      • Oct 1, 20135:34 pm
        by oats


        I agree with tarsier’s answer about drive and kick passers, but Monroe’s passing out of the post should have similar results to a drive and kick as well. I’d say it would be Monroe and Smith that would do most of the setting up for Jennings. Then again, Jennings is a guy that doesn’t really need a lot of setting up. His biggest strength as an outside shooter is his ability to run the pick and roll, and then pop out to the 3 point line and take a shot. That does not require someone else who is good at the drive and kick game.

        • Oct 1, 20138:17 pm
          by tarsier


          Well pointed out. Jennings has never really been a catch and shoot guy. He may be good at that, but who knows. He’s always been more of one to create his own shot.

          • Oct 2, 20133:22 pm
            by Max

            He did it a bit when he played with Luke Ridnour.  

  • Sep 30, 201310:36 pm
    by sc8581


    I like Stuckey more than most Piston fans I’m sure but no way can he start at the 2 unless Singler or Datome start at the 3 and Monroe comes off the bench, Jennings can’t create spacing by himself, he’s not even that much of a threat from outside to begin with.

    • Sep 30, 201311:21 pm
      by tarsier


      Why would it be Monroe coming off the bench as opposed to Smith or Drummond?

      • Oct 1, 201312:38 am
        by The Guru


        Tarsier let me put you on a little secret…Sc8581 has extremely low basketball IQ…When you read someones comment that says Singler or Datome(who has no NBA experience) should start at the 3 while Monroe comes off the bench, you should quickly learn to ignore that person…Please, please, please ignore that person…

        • Oct 1, 201312:40 am
          by Max


          HAHA.  Marv Albert, “Yes!”

      • Oct 1, 20132:35 am
        by sc8581


        He would still get around 32 mpg or more, he can play both positions and his skill-set would be better utilized off the bench than the other 2. It’s pretty simple actually, you don’t have to be a “Guru” to figure it out.

        • Oct 1, 201311:55 am
          by The Guru


          Hopefully you’re not sensitive and you have thick skin…I was just playing about the low basketball IQ comment…I gotta admit that you post weird comments though bro…

          • Oct 1, 20131:39 pm
            by sebastian

            Yo Guru, maybe because as the self-appointed, Grand Pubba of the Rodney Stuckey Reclamation Project, I would have to agree with my fellow Pistons fan, sc8581. Stuckey is easily the most versatile player on the roster, if used correctly.
            On this current Pistons roster, Stuckey should be the 6th-man, playing the PG position when he first sees the floor. Stuckey should log 28-32 minutes in his new role.
            Stuckey can lead a team. Wait a minute, I hear you Stuckey-haters screaming bloody murder, but let’s just see what me, sc8581, and Max’s boy can do when he is playing with a full deck (roster).
            Stuckey can very easily excel at the Jarret Jack role for OUR 2013-14 Pistons!

          • Oct 1, 20138:20 pm
            by oats

            How is Stuckey the most versatile player exactly? He’s a pretty one dimensional player. He has a nice dribble penetration game, and not much else. That said, he’s not all that good at actually finishing at the rim either. He is ok at 2 positions, but that isn’t that uncommon. Billups can play the same two positions. Monroe plays two positions. Smith plays two positions. Singler plays at least 2, and arguably 3 positions if you can buy into him playing some small ball PF. JJ plays 2 positions. All of those guys are as versatile as Stuckey. They all have fairly limited games that can fit into 2 different positions. I think I’d argue for Smith as the most versatile player on the roster though. He is a good ball handler for a power forward and a really good passer for either position that he plays. Smith is also good at defending both of his positions while Stuckey is pretty average defensively. Smith is also a fantastic finisher near the hoop. I’d say that makes him the most versatile player on the roster.

          • Oct 2, 20133:27 pm
            by Max

            Stuckey can play three positions and has matched up against LeBron on both ends.  He also is elite at taking care of the ball, shoots free throws very well, can post up guards and has a better midrange game than he gets credit for.  

          • Oct 3, 20137:36 am
            by oats

            Stuckey is a truly awful SF. He does nothing well there. Defensively he might be competent for a play or two, but it clearly wears him down really fast and he quickly becomes a sieve. He is just not suited for guarding traditional SFs. He could get away with if the opponents are using a 3 guard set, but that’s about it. Admittedly the bulk of his work there offensively came last year when he was just not a good basketball player, but that means that the vast majority of our information suggests that he can not score effectively from that spot. I would much rather play Josh Smith at center than Stuckey at SF. If we are talking about him playing there, we might as well talk about JJ playing both SG and C. He actually has done both in his career, and defended those positions at least as well as Stuckey defends the 3. For that matter, he sort of shared point guard duties with Prince in some bizarre sets when he was a rookie.
            Stuckey is ok at setting up his team mates, has an ok mid range game, and is an ok defender. He is good at getting to the hoop, protecting the ball, drawing contact, and hitting free throws. However, he is also below average at converting at the rim. It should be noted that all of those skills are pretty closely related. He does have a solid post game, but he just doesn’t do much with it. Nice player over all, but not exactly all that versatile. He’s a dribble penetration guard with solid handles and enough passing to play the point but not enough to be a good passer for that position. Yeah, I’m sticking with Smith as the most versatile player for the reasons I’ve already given. I guess an argument could be made for Singler’s ability to be average at every aspect of the game, but Smith has the most things he is actually good at.

  • Oct 1, 20139:38 am
    by gmehl


    My 2 cents on the starting and some various others because I was bored and can’t wait for the god damn season to start.

    Lineup 1 (My likely starting lineup with KCP the one that has it in front of him to win the starting SG spot).
    PG Jennings – here to control the offence with low TO and provide outside shooting.
    SG KCP – hopefully provides outside shooting and solid D. Looking for him to be a classic 3&D SG.
    SF Smith – out of position but only until 1 of Moose and Dre goes to the bench.
    PF Monroe – looking for Moose to improve his D and midrange game. Should watch film of Patrick Ewing.
    C Drummond – Dre just needs to get another 12-15 more per game and his stats will almost double.

    Lineup 2 (Drummond sits – this lineup will be the first rotation… obviously Datome to fight for his spot here having no NBA experience which I don’t think will bean issue).
    PG Billups – likely to come in to control the offence if Jennings is stinking it up or just needs a spell.
    SG Stuckey – can be effective in this role if Datome can spread the floor.
    SF Datome – this is the guy I feel that can get a lot of guys on the floor. Awesome 3 point shooter.
    PF Smith – back at his natural position look for him to prosper with Drummond sitting.
    C Monroe – i am interested to see how he fits with Smith. Both are great passers.

    Lineup 3 (Monroe sits – this lineup looks like it could be the best space setting one to free up the post for Drummond and Smith to go to work down low).
    PG Jennings – 3pt shooting and ball control. Small stature next Billups could be an issue. 
    SG Billups – 3pt shooting and ball control. Ageing slow defence could be an issue.
    SF Datome – here to spread the floor with anything else provided a plus.
    PF Smith – still at PF but beside Dre should provide many Sportcenter highlights.
    C Drummond – with Smith beside him should almost be like Wallace x2 days.

    Lineup 4 (3pt shooting lineup to win or tie a game)
    PG Jennings
    SG Billups
    SF KCP
    PF Datome
    C Villanueva

    • Oct 1, 201312:12 pm
      by Corey


      I pray lineup 4 will never happen.  You still have to run a play to get someone an open 3 pt shot.  Put Andre out there with Jennings or Billups at PG and 3 shooters. Then they run pick and roll to get an open 3 pter or Andre at the basket.  And you have to play D after scoring. So Andre would help on that end, too.

      Billups and Jennings can both shoot the 3 off the dribble if their defender goes under the pick, so this kind of lineup could really work for the pistons – With Drummond at Center as the roll man and defensive anchor of an otherwise-iffy defensive lineup.

    • Oct 1, 20131:48 pm
      by sebastian


      gmehl … you really are exhausted with the off season, me too, homes. But, there ain’t no way in hell KCP will see minutes at the SF position. Mo’ Cheeks is not John Kuester or L. Frank, playing guys out of position and all.
      But, yeah, let’s get this sh!t ['13-'14 season] started!

      • Oct 1, 20136:42 pm
        by oats


        Yeah, that makes no sense to me. Every team in the league plays traditional SGs at SF sometimes, and in certain situations it makes sense for Detroit to do the same. He easily could be called on to defend another team’s undersized SF when they are in a 3 guard set. Another option is when the Pistons are getting blown out and they are just trying to get shooters on the floor in the hopes that they can hit enough 3s to get back in it. He will also almost certainly be in the game at SF if the team is down by 3 with only a few seconds left in the game, assuming of course that he can beat out Singler for that spot. Those are the only 2 situations where that 4th lineup makes any sense at all to be honest.
        What’s more, it’s not like there is a big discrepancy between SGs and SFs anyways. They are fairly interchangeable. Yeah, Pope has no business guarding someone like James or Anthony, but there aren’t that many really big SFs. If Miami is playing James at the 4 and someone like Battier at SF then there is no reason that Pope couldn’t play the 3. There are probably more SFs that he could guard than not league wide. I mean, are you convinced that Singler would be a better defensive option on much of anyone? On offense the role is usually defined by the players on hand, and there are nearly as many jump shooting SFs as there are SFs that play in the paint. I’m really not seeing a good reason not to play Kentavious there at least some of the time, even if his more natural position is at SG.
        Playing KCP a few minutes at the 3 just seems like an inevitability. The team has Jennings, Billups, Bynum, and Stuckey all capable of playing the point. If it makes sense for those guys to get enough minutes then they will also see a lot of the SG minutes given to Billups and Stuckey. Heck, we might even see some Bynum and Jennings combinations. All of that squeezes Pope’s minutes, so he likely will see a few at SF where he is competing against Singler, Datome, and Jerebko. I feel like I should mention that the chaotic nature of a basketball rotation means that Singler will likely see a few minutes at SG as well. These things happen all the time. I’d be shocked if there weren’t at least a handful of minutes where KCP plays SF.

  • Oct 1, 20139:59 am
    by Bob


    re read that guru, he didn’t say they should start. I agree, no way Monroe comes off the bench. Even if he possibly should . I agree with everything you said sc ( except I can’t stand stuckey) guess I have a low bb iq In his opinion too… Not gonna lose too much sleep over it tho

    • Oct 1, 201311:36 am
      by sc8581


      I think Stuckey is just as good overall as Jennings, BJ is younger and a little bit better shooter but Stuckey takes care of the ball better and is better on D. Assuming Billups and Stuckey are the 2nd unit guards Rodney will yet again be misused because he likely won’t have the ball in his hands much with CB out there. Maybe they let him run the show to drive up his trade value but I doubt it, he’ll probably end up rotting on the bench for the season while Singler and Bynum steal his minutes. I hope to see him get traded and get a chance in a role he can succeed though, whether it’s starting or coming off the bench for a playoff team.

      • Oct 1, 20137:37 pm
        by oats


        There is no truth to the notion that Stuckey takes care of the ball better. Stuckey turns it over 2.4 times per 36 minutes while Jennings turns it over 2.5 times per 36 minutes. The difference there is insignificant. Yet Jennings shoots more often and has more assists per 36 minutes than Stuckey. That means that he uses more possessions, but doesn’t turn it over any more. Of the two, Jennings is the one who is less likely to turn it over on any given possession. The difference is pretty small. Jennings turns it over on 12.3% of his possessions against Stuckey’s 13.1%, but Jennings is actually a tiny bit better at taking care of the ball.
        On the other hand, Stuckey actually has had 2 years where he was an efficient scorer. The two years prior to last season he had a true shooting percentage of .544 and .550 respectively. Jennings has a career high of .514. The biggest cause of that shooting jump was him cutting down on long twos. If Jennings can do the same thing then he should end up being the better shooter of the two, but as of now there is not much difference in the expected point gain of a shot from Stuckey and a shot from Jennings.
        The fact that Jennings has a slight advantage at getting assists and that his better range makes him a better fit alongside the front court pretty much guarantees that he is going to be the starter. As for who is the better player, well, that’s a pretty tight call. If Stuckey plays like he did last year then the answer is very obviously Jennings. If Stuckey reverts to what he was the two years prior to last then a real argument can be made that Stuckey is actually the better player. Yet Jennings is 3 years younger and has a lot more room to grow. If he can become more disciplined in both his shot selection and his defense then Jennings could end up being a lot better than Stuckey pretty soon.

      • Oct 3, 20138:52 am
        by tarsier


        Stuckey is good at taking care of the ball. Jennings’ is very good at taking care of the ball. It is probably his biggest strength. Stuckey is a better defender, but not nearly as much better as he should be.

  • Oct 1, 201311:34 am
    by The Guru


    Listen…If we start Jennings/Stuckey together it’ll be for defensive reasons…Our identity is defense and our team relies on defense…Stuckey’s role will be to help control the ball and help Jennings get his jumper off…If you didn’t know, Jennings has a nice mid range and a nice 3pter…Starting Jennings/Stuckey/Smith/Monroe/Drummond together will be scary defensively and Jennings, Monroe, and Smith will be our offense…Stuckey, Smith, and Drummond’s role will be help defense and other overall defensive purposes…Now when we starting making substitutions for Singler, KCP, Billups and Charlie V, that’s when I think we’ll see running and more offense…That’s my opinion…
    @Bob: Please don’t lose any sleep over it because we’re on a social network…Lets not take anything here too serious…

    • Oct 1, 201311:39 am
      by sc8581


      Hell, if that’s the case start Stuckey and KCP in the backcourt and our defense will be great.

      • Oct 1, 201311:51 am
        by The Guru


        Stuckey isn’t a PG, he’s a 6’5 combo guard who can defend SG’s…KCP is an unproven rookie…

        • Oct 1, 20131:07 pm
          by sc8581


          Your opinion. Mine is that he needs to play PG and is just as good as Jennings at doing so.

          • Oct 1, 20133:31 pm
            by MIKEYDE248

            In my opinion, he should be selling hotdogs in the stands with CV.

          • Oct 3, 20138:54 am
            by tarsier


            and your opinion is demonstrably wrong based on 6 seasons worth of evidence

          • Oct 3, 20136:31 pm
            by oats

            I feel like there is a strong argument that Stuckey’s last season as a starting PG was actually better than Jennings has been. That year may have just been the outlier, but I do think it is hard to conclude that sc8581 is demonstrably wrong in his assertion that Stuckey is best at PG and as good of one as Jennings.
            Look at the their per 36 numbers in question. This would be their 4th years in the league. Last year was the best for Jennings, and Stuckey’s 5th season is when the Pistons drafted Knight.
            Jennings: 17.5 points, 6.5 assists, 2.5 turnovers, 1.6 steals, .510 true shooting percentage.
            Stuckey: 17.8 points, 6 assists, 2.6 turnovers, 1.3 steals, .544 true shooting percentage.
            That’s awfully damn close. Despite the steals number, Stuckey was the better defender and a much more efficient scorer. Jennings has pretty minor passing advantages. All in all, it’s pretty close but I think I’d give a slight edge to Stuckey. There is also a very large pace discrepancy. The Bucks were the 3rd fastest team in the league last year while the Pistons were the 28th fastest in 2010-11. Per 100 possessions numbers are interesting.
            Jennings: 23.8 points, 21.3 FGA, 8.9 assists, 3.5 turnovers.
            Stuckey: 25.8 points,  19.8 FGA, 8.6 assists, 3.7 turnovers.
            So Stuckey scores more points on fewer shots, and the passing numbers are nearly identical. In addition to that, Stuckey is the better defender of the two. I think I’ll take year 4 Stuckey over year 4 Jennings. The problem with this argument is simple, Stuckey has played more than 4 seasons and last season he was really awful. Then again, he also got moved off the ball in the 2 years since then. That at least seems like a reasonable argument that Stuckey is a PG, or at least someone that is best when he gets to play the point some. I don’t know if Stuckey can return to form by going back to playing PG, and that 4th year may have been an anomaly. Still, it seems like the argument for Stuckey being as good of a PG as Jennings has some merit.

        • Oct 1, 20138:03 pm
          by oats


          Stuckey is not a good defender. I don’t know why some people think that he is. I suspect it’s all the talk from the organization about his defensive potential. He does have stretches where he plays good defense, but he has more and longer stretches where he is a bad defender. He’s somewhere between average and below average defensively. There also doesn’t seem to be a big difference in which position he defends, he’s pretty much the same at defending either spot. He’s a little slow against most PGs and sometimes struggles to keep in front of them. He’s also a bad off ball defender who is prone to ball watching, and SGs tend to spend more time defending a guy who does not have the ball. Stuckey is also a little slow at realizing when he needs to close out on shooters. The end result is he just isn’t that good of a defensive player at either spot.
          With all the rookie mistakes he will make, I would not be that surprised if Pope is actually the better defender of the two this year. He is much quicker than Stuckey, and the inch height advantage also makes a difference when closing out on shooters. Yes, I know they are both listed at 6’5″, but Stuckey is 6’4.5″ rounded up while Pope is 6’5.5″ rounded down. If defense is the concern, it makes far more sense to me to just start Pope. Even if he isn’t quite as good defensively as Stuckey just yet, the fact that he is at least a threat to hit a jump shot means that he wouldn’t be as damaging offensively. Starting 4 guys with no jump shot is a really bad idea, and whatever defensive edge Stuckey provides is just not worth it.

          • Oct 2, 20131:12 pm
            by sc8581

            I’ve said from the beginning KCP should start simply because we know he will be at least a capable defender and can shoot.

          • Oct 2, 20134:43 pm
            by sebastian

            Okay, Oats, you have reminded US that you do not like Rodney Stuckey.

          • Oct 3, 20137:11 am
            by oats

            Thanks for inaccurately boiling down my opinion. I always love when someone tries to remove any nuance to a statement, and thereby completely misrepresents what is actually being said. I never said I dislike Stuckey. I actually like Stuckey. In fact, if you read everything I’ve written in this thread, you’ll see that I acknowledged that Stuckey might be better than Jennings right now. Right after the Jennings pick up I actually argued that Stuckey was a better player when he got the contract he is currently on than Jennings has been up to this point. His 4th year in the league he was better than Jennings was last year, and he was better in Knight’s rookie season as well. Then last year happened and he was awful. Maybe that was a fluke, or maybe the oddity was the 2 really good years before last year. I really don’t know the answer to that. That means that I am open to the idea that Stuckey might be the best player at either guard spot this year. I just don’t like it when people misrepresent his skill set.
            Stuckey is good at taking care of the ball, even if he is just a tiny bit worse at it than Jennings who also is good in that area. He is roughly as good as the other point guards at setting his team up for assists at this point in their respective careers. Jennings is a tiny bit ahead of him right now, and I suspect that if Chauncey moved back on ball he would also still be better. Yet the gap is relatively small between these guys. He excels at getting to the hoop, and in doing so he is also good at getting to the line. He also has a reasonable chance of being the best defender at either guard spot. I suspect that Pope might do a better job on SGs. Siva might be better at defending the point, but likely won’t play. Stuckey is at worst a close number 2 at either spot, and might be the best at both. Admittedly this is because the guards are pretty bad defensively while Stuckey is closer to average, but even if he is just the second best at both positions that should make him the best overall guard defender on the roster. There are a lot of things to like about Stuckey’s game.
            I think Stuckey’s game is a terrible fit alongside the 3 big men though, and there is absolutely no reason for starting him alongside those guys that makes sense. If one of them moves to the bench then he would be good, but I don’t see that happening. Assuming that he returns to his form from before last season then he should absolutely be the 6th man and in the game pretty much the entire time one of the big men is on the bench. What’s more, he might be the best guard on the roster despite being a 6th man if he starts playing like he is capable of playing. If he plays like last year instead, well, then the he might play himself out of what is shaping up to be a much more competitive rotation. That’s the range for him. Yet it’s important to note that I don’t actually dislike Stuckey.

  • Oct 2, 20133:09 pm
    by anacaniwelk


    If only the rest of the Pistons could shoot free throws as well as Rodney Stuckey does.

    • Oct 3, 201310:45 am
      by MIKEYDE248


      Good thing we have Chauncey back, to help out with the free throw percentage.

      I used to be a big Stuckey fan in his first couple of years, but I don’t think he fits with the rest of the team anymore.  His biggest assets use to be gettting to the basket and drawing fowls.  He seemed to stop doing that the last couple of years.

      The reason he doesn’t turn the ball over too often is because he doesn’t pass as often either.  He tends to dribble the ball until the clock is too low to pass, then he has to crank up a bad shot.

      • Oct 3, 20136:39 pm
        by oats


        Two years ago was the season when Stuckey had his career high in free throw attempts per minutes played. Him not getting to the line is a one year phenomenon and not an ongoing trend. It should also be noted that last year was by far the least he has played the PG position, and that might have something to do with his decline in free throw attempts. Whatever the cause, it is distinctly possible that last year was a one year anomaly and he might return to form. 

  • Oct 7, 20134:22 pm
    by gtg2013


    How much credence should we give NBARank, anyway? I’ve dropped in now and then, expecting Brandon Jennings to show up anytime, starting at #140 or so. But George Hill has just been named #85–and still no Jennings. Which means ESPN has Jennings better overall than Hill. Oh, and Manu Ginobili. And Steve Nash. And Marcin Gortat.

    • Oct 7, 20134:27 pm
      by Patrick Hayes


      I didn’t participate in NBA Rank this year, but I generally think it’s pretty good, as far as rankings go.

      Let’s be honest — all rankings like this are silly. There are always going to be arguments, for a variety of reasons. ESPN’s is interesting, though, because it really uses “wisdom of the crowd.” The rankings are based on votes of dozens of writers who cover the NBA, both for ESPN and for TrueHoop blogs. So there are obviously guys who get over or under looked in the rankings (and your Jennings example is a good one), but I think the fact that their list includes votes from a huge cross-section of writers compared to other outlets that only have a couple of writers determining all rankings makes them worthwhile to look at.

      They’re certainly not an end-all authority on the value of players, but they’re definitely interesting, particularly for off-season content. 

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here