During the weeks immediately preceding the NBA draft, we often hear General Managers of NBA teams discuss their intent to draft the “best available player.” Usually this pronouncement comes in the context of whether that team plans to draft a player based on an obvious current need, instead of one that is considered to have more long-term “potential.” I have no idea where the phrase “best available player” originated, but it has since been picked up by columnists, experts, and even fans. It’s not uncommon to see entire threads on internet discussion forums devoted to whether their favorite team should select the “best available player” over a glaring need. Invariably, “best available player” wins.
Here’s the problem: Outside of the top two or three picks, there ain’t no such thing.
The phrase “best available player” has no independent meaning. There is no single metric that will crunch data and spit out an ordinal ranking of all players eligible to be drafted. Whether a particular player is “best” depends on each team’s evaluation and valuation of what qualities are most important as a predictor of future success, and how well a particular player may fit into the identity and style of play of the team. There is no consensus; it is completely subjective. I’ve concluded that GMs use this phrase for a post hoc rationalization of every pick that they make. It is a crutch.
What, you think that a GM of a pro team will say, “we took Player X even though he wasn’t the best player left on the board”? I can hardly think of a quicker way to get fired.
So don’t be surprised if the GM of your favorite team goes on your local radio station after the draft and gleefully announces that they were looking to draft the “best available player” . . . and he just happened to fill a glaring need at the same time. Imagine that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
While I agree that a universal "best player available" doesn't exist, I still can see a team taking a "best player available" off of their own organizational big board.
ReplyDeleteAre you commenting more on the objectivity of a "best player available" or saying every team drafts for need?
I'm commenting on the objectivity of the "best available player." Sure, every team has its own listing, but it is unique, and not shared by other teams. To take it to the extreme, player X could be ranked tenth on every team's chart, but not be drafted until #20 overall, because their top 9 players are so different.
ReplyDeleteBut, again, the factors that each team uses to order all the prospects will vary greatly. As fans, we don't know what those factors are--so clamoring for our team to select the "best overall player" gets us no closer to who we want them to draft!
I agree with that, but that's where I think the best available player thing comes from.
ReplyDeleteThe best player is always going to be subjective, and each team has their own independent big boards, so they are still drafting the "best player available" from their own boards.
I like how this weeds out all the unavailable players.
ReplyDelete"We considered taking the BPA, but we really felt Fran Vasquez was better than the players that were actually available to play for us. We look forward to many years of him not contributing."
I love this.
ReplyDelete"We felt Jonas Jarebko was the BPU, so we couldn't pass him up."