Blog Entry

Here come the player rankings

Posted on: October 19, 2009 10:13 am
Edited on: October 19, 2009 10:14 am

The player rankings are coming today, and there's no way to do them without providing an explanation.

So here is your explanation.

Please read it.

I beg you.

It could save us both a lot of time.

Dear Reader:

Just like last year I separated the players into three categories -- specifically point guards and combo guards, shooting guards and wings, and big forwards and centers. This was done for a variety of reasons, not the least of which was to help avoid endless debates about whether Isaiah Thomas is a point guard or shooting guard, Xavier Henry is a shooting guard or small forward, Kyle Singler is a small forward or power forward, and so on and so forth. Trust me, had I broken this into the five conventional positions we would've argued about all that stuff and more. So this way is better, I think, and what I tried to do is group the players based on the following descriptions:

1. Point guards and combo guards

This category includes:
  • Point guards
  • Combo guards
2. Shooting guards and wings

This category includes:
  • Shooting guards
  • Small forwards
  • Power forwards who are closer to being small forwards than centers
3. Big forwards and centers

This category includes
  • Power forwards who are closer to being centers than small forwards
  • Centers
Simple enough, right?

Now let me make three final points before I go:

Point No. 1: Please don't look at the list of "Point guards and combo guards" and send some email about how I am stupid to have forgotten Willie Warren. I didn't forget him. I just concluded that he's a better fit for the "Shooting guards and wings" category because he's just not going to play much point guard with Tommy Mason-Griffin at Oklahoma, and these are the decisions I had to make. Some of it is subjective, I admit, and there's a good chance I will, in hindsight, wish I would've put a guy in a different category; we'll deal with that when it happens. But what I'm trying to say is that if you're looking for a player and don't see him, ask yourself whether I could've put him in another category. If so, I probably did. If not, he's probably not as good as you think.

Point No. 2: These rankings are not based on NBA potential; I can't stress that enough. An NBA general manager would clearly take Solomon Alabi over Luke Harangody, but no college coach would, and that's how I ranked the players. Put another way, these rankings are designed to reflect what I think of these prospects as college basketball players, which is why someone's status as a "future lottery pick" doesn't carry much weight if he isn't also a big-time college performer. Likewise, if someone is great in college I don't care if he might be too short for the NBA. I'm not drafting for the NBA here. I'm ranking college basketball players.

Point No. 3: I don't mind feedback or criticism, but I do have one request: Try not to send a simple "Player X is too low, you idiot!" note. Rather, tell me where you'd put him and which player you'd move down to put him there. In other words, an email that says "Deonta Vaughan is too low" accomplishes nothing. I want one that says "Deonta Vaughan is too low; he should be higher than Shelvin Mack." Or whatever. Just explain yourself, that's all. And remember, you can't have 11 players in the Top 10. You have to remove somebody before you can insert somebody else, so be sure to keep that in mind.

OK, I think that's it.

Any questions, just ask.

(Just don't ask dumb questions.)


Your pal.


Since: Oct 1, 2009
Posted on: October 21, 2009 3:59 pm

Here come the player rankings

yes, that would be will coleman kissing the rim then doing a windmill dunk.
at the same time. 
while the media outlets of the nation are bending over for kentucky, memphis is packing the fedex forum, kissing rims, and stocking its 2010-2011 team with powerhouse recruits. 
sleeping beauty? a beast awakens? ohh the taglines the media can play with...

Since: Oct 1, 2009
Posted on: October 21, 2009 3:56 pm

Here come the player rankings

will coleman should be on this list for the simple fact of what he accomplishes as seen in this video:

Since: Aug 24, 2006
Posted on: October 20, 2009 5:47 pm

Here come the player rankings

Here are some points that I would like addressed-

Combo/PG's:  The best in the country should be combo guards too-  however combo guards are not usually good point guards.  True point guards should be weighted higher as a result.  Wall (KY) is a Combo Guard from what little I have seen and heard of him.  reason?  He does not have a passer's mentality, which is a strike against him  Apparently you do not agree.  FT"s under pressure?  We do not know.

Shooting Guards and Wings:  What a great Category!  Scorers should dominate.  I hope that you weight Assists here, as well as Shot Blockers, Steals, and Rebounds.

PF's/Centers-  Last year, it seemed that this was a height plus weight contest.  It would be nice to see some of the guys that shoot well, don't turn the ball over, are shot blockers without flouing out guys.  I hate to keep going back to what I know best, but a 6-10 Gorna Suton was WAY better of a COLLEGE (not NBA) PLAYER than Cole Aldridge and BJ Mullins.  How did you rate them?  Take a guess.  In this example, Suton outplayed both of them head to head, out shot, stole, defended, and rebounded both of these guys.  The only thing he didn't do better was dunk under the basket and be tall.  Yet he and others like him are routinely ignored.

Good luck, and we will be watching!!!

Since: Mar 21, 2008
Posted on: October 19, 2009 11:29 am

Wooden List ballot review

Hi Gary,

Just a note as you get this started...

I noticed that on your Wooden List ballot you did not include JuJuan Johnson of Purdue on your ballot, and it appeared that he didn't make the list of those being considered on at least 3 of the 6 ballots...

Curious as to why JuJu didn't make your cut and Wesley, 'the other' Johnson at Syracuse did?

I think Wesley 'might' get slightly better scoring numbers at Syracuse, which will need a scorer, whereas JuJu is only one of three important cogs on what I think will be a very good Purdue team, but will most likely be a better rebounder/defender. I think JuJu will be more important to what I predict will be a more successful Purdue team (compared to Syracuse).

Just curious!

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or