NBArank 2012 Wrap

A few weeks ago, I wrote about the complete waste of time that is ESPN's NBArank project. Then I admitted that I would be following it closely to see how the Wizards' players were rated and then using that data as an indication of how the team might perform during the 2012-2013 season. While I know the only thing that will truly make me feel better about my team is performance in the win-loss column, I'll take any dram of hope I can get before the season starts. After all, with the Wizards, it's often all about hope.

The 2012 NBArank data is now in the books. Well, that's not exactly true. Number one won't be revealed until late next week or maybe even the week after, but for the Wizards, it was in the books once spot number 51 was reached. That of course means that the ESPN "experts" feel our team has none of the top 50 players currently playing in the NBA and that may very well be true. But does that mean that we don't have a better team on paper than last year? Maybe or maybe not. Let's take a look at how the team stacks up in the NBArank this year.

We currently have 14 players under contract, which is one less than the league roster maximum. Our 14 players, with NBArank position are:

• 52: Nenê
• 55: John Wall
• 101: Emeka Okafor
• 142: Trevor Ariza
• 170: Bradley Beal
• 218: Jordan Crawford
• 266: Jan Vesely
• 279: Trevor Booker
• 281: Kevin Seraphin
• 292: Martell Webster
• 360: Chris Singleton
• 384: A.J. Price
• 396: Shelvin Mack
• 435: Cartier Martin

Last year, the Wizards placed two players in the top 100; three players each between 101 and 200 and 201 and 300; four players between 301 and 400; and our other three fell outside the top 400. This year, our results by hundred are similar, except that instead of three players between 200 and 300, we now have five, with the upward movement coming from the 300s and 400s. Three of our players between 201 and 300 (Vesely, Booker and Seraphin) moved up at least 40 spots from last year, with Seraphin moving up more than 150 spots. That sounds right: Book and Kevin made significant progress in their second years; I'm actually surprised Kevin wasn't ahead of Ves and Book. These guys are in all likelihood going to be the first guys off the bench. Having these guys more developed for the entire season is going to be key. Overall, better on paper this year.

Our two players in the top 100 last year were John Wall (at 40) and JaVale McGee (at 99). This year, our two in the top 100 are Nenê and Wall. While Wall fell 15 spots from his ranking last year, I'm not sure that means he's worse than he was last year. Consider the personnel John has had to work with in his first two years; I am sure guys like Rajon Rondo and Chris Paul would struggle with Nick Young and Jordan Crawford as their leading scorers too. I don't know how much I really have to say about Nenê as an upgrade over McGee. The difference is night and day. Sure, you don't get the highlight dunks out of Nenê that you get out of McGee but you don't get all the other baggage either. I don't think we'll see Nenê alley ooping to himself while the Wizards are getting blown out or claiming to not understand what coach says he's doing wrong or running back on defense while we still possess the ball. No cinnamon eating either! Top 100, better on paper this year.

Last year, our projected starting five were the top five guys on NBArank's list: Wall, Nick Young, Rashard Lewis, Andray Blatche and McGee. This year, our projected starting five at least at the beginning of the year are our top four plus the sixth man, Jordan Crawford, on our list this year. Personnel-wise, there's only one man in common: John Wall. By the numbers, Young blows away Crawford at shooting guard, Lewis last year supposedly beats out Ariza this year, Nenê destroys Blatche at power forward, and McGee edges Okafor at center. On paper, the starting five is better last year but there's no way that starting five lived up to its potential. Not even close. I'll take the personnel we have this year over the dysfunction that pervaded the organization last year. Our starting five last year didn't stay that way for long. By mid-season, Lewis and Blatche were sitting in favor of Chris Singleton and Trevor Booker. Compare that starting five to this year's starters and this year is better on paper.

Finally, it turns out I was totally wrong about the ranking order of our players last year. I clearly have a higher opinion of Kevin Seraphin's ability than the experts. I guess that's why I'm a fan and not an expert.

So what does all that mean? Absolutely nothing. But I'm excited to see how we do. Training camp starts two weeks from today. By the way, ESPN (probably a different panel of experts) picked the Wizards to finish 12th in the East with a 31-51 record. In the past, I've bristled at the low projections for my team's finish by ESPN. I even printed out the predictions one year so I could pull it out when they were proved wrong, but by mid-season it was obvious they weren't. 12th in the conference and 31 wins would be an improvement over last year. I'm hoping our team is a sleeper who can make a little noise this year. Hope has to be worth something, right?

The Things We Do With Our Lives...

If someone from about 500 years ago managed to find a time machine and took a trip forward to 2012, I am sure they would look at some of the things we do today and marvel at some of the useless, non-productive stuff we spend/waste our time on. Case in point: ESPN's NBArank project.

Last fall, ESPN canvassed a group of 91 NBA "experts" to rank players who play, have recently played or are likely to soon play in the NBA on a ten point scale. The network then compiled all the results and published the top 500 list, in reverse order, over several weeks on their website with announcements through Twitter. The result of all this time and effort is theoretically a list of the best to worst NBA players. I have no idea how these experts would have spent their time, let alone how they would have earned money, before ESPN existed but whatever. Well, this year it's back but this time with 104 experts to make it even better.

Having sort of argued this is a total waste of time, if there are two things I could spend all day doing, it's making lists and examining statistics so of course I love this stuff. I'm sure I'll be spending the next few weeks awaiting the next batch of results as the list counts down from 500 to 1. 500 seems like the right length, by the way, since there are 30 teams carrying a maximum of 15 players thus capturing all the players from last year, recent draftees and maybe a handful of free agents.

So since this is the first day of the list, I thought I'd take a look at how my beloved Washington Wizards fared last year in the eyes of the experts. Since the list was published at the beginning of last season, I figure it makes sense to start with the players that made the team on December 25, the first day of the season. If the experts were right, I'd expect our players to rank pretty low on the list, although the case could easily be made that last year the Wizards collectively performed at a level below the sum of their parts, at least until shortly after the trade deadline when we shipped out JaVale McGee and Nick Young and told Andray Blatche to just stay home and keep collecting a paycheck. The ultimate point of this whole exercise will be to make myself feel better about this upcoming season.

The Wizards opened last season with 15 players and all 15 were on last year's NBArank. Here's our roster from opening day last year:

• 40: John Wall
• 99: JaVale McGee
• 124: Rashard Lewis
• 146: Nick Young
• 147: Andray Blatche
• 210: Jordan Crawford
• 247: Ronny Turiaf
• 279: Roger Mason, Jr.
• 313: Jan Vesely
• 320: Maurice Evans
• 321: Trevor Booker
• 360: Chris Singleton
• 435: Kevin Seraphin
• 469: Shelvin Mack
• 486: Hamady Ndiaye

Of the top eight on the list, six are gone: McGee, Lewis, Young and Turiaf were traded away; Blatche was released via the amnesty provision in the collective bargaining agreement; and Mason departed via free agency. Of the bottom seven on the list, five are still around: Maurice Evans remains an unsigned free agent and Hamady Ndiaye was released last year. On the surface it doesn't seem too smart to jettison six of your supposed eight best players, unless what we got back was greater in value and/or you subscribe to my theory that the reason our team underperformed in the first half of last season was due to lack of team cohesion rather than lack of talent. Don't get me wrong here, lack of talent was still a contributing factor.

Considering last season's results, I'd change the order of the list for the seven guys remaining on our roster. I'd put Wall first without a doubt, but then follow him with Seraphin, Crawford, Booker, Vesely, Singleton and Mack. I also think Wall was ranked too high at 40 (as was McGee at 99, in my opinion) and Seraphin too low at 435, but I'm not sure I'd expect dramatic movement out of anyone else remaining from Christmas Day last year.

The real improvement on the court this coming season (if there is any real improvement) is going to come from the guys who were not on the team last year. Perhaps NBArank can help portend these results. Right now we have six guys under contract who didn't start last year with the Wizards: Bradley Beal, Trevor Ariza, Nenê, Cartier Martin, Emeka Okafor and A.J. Price. Beal is a rookie and wasn't ranked last year. Nenê and Okafor were 31 and 71 respectively and Trevor Ariza was 113. So basically we traded away 99 and 124 (McGee and Lewis) and got back three guys all ranked higher in the eyes of the experts. All three should be starters when the season starts on October 30. Price is potentially our backup point guard; he was ranked higher than Shelvin Mack last year, but not by much. Having Price and Mack backing up John Wall continues to be a question mark. Cartier Martin came in at 432 last year but I believe Cartier will end up higher on the list this year. I think he will prove to be useful as a clutch shooter as the season progresses.

So are the Wizards a better team on paper in the eyes of the experts? I think so. I think our starting frontcourt will grade out well and our starting two guard will be the weakest link in the starting lineup. I also think NBArank will demonstrate this weakness and our lack of depth at point guard. I'll follow over the next few weeks and see how it goes.