Where do you draw the line for "star"?

[Ron Swanson]

I mean, there are different "star" monikers for a reason. All-Stars can range anywhere from fringe All-NBA guys (Siakam, Middleton, BAM!) to guys who are only "All-Stars" in name only when they arguably didn't deserve to be there (Jrue Holiday, D'Angelo Russell, Brad Miller, etc.). Superstar is a different tier and something you should generally only reserve for the Top-10 or so players in the league who have shown it with relative consistency.

If you're asking me for a baseline prerequisite for being labelled a star, then I'd say that at least two legitimate/no-brainer All-Star selections means you've firmly established yourself in that category. I don't know why people so closely associate it with popularity and points. Even amongst the casual fan NBA populace, I can't fathom that anyone truly thought a guy like Jerry Stackhouse was more of a "star" than Ben Wallace just because he scored 30 PPG one season.

[SA37]

To me, a star is a player you can build a ~50-win team around. In other words, the player is good enough that teams will make other personnel decisions based on how those players will fit with the star’s game. Edit: Also, you are a marquee attraction within the league; opposing teams’ fans pay money and are looking forward to going to see you play.

In the NBA right now, these guys are stars:

LeBron, Giannis, Jokic, Doncic, Curry, Harden, Westbrook, Anthony Davis, Paul George, Leonard, Durant, Embiid, Lillard, Griffin, and Paul

Possibly stars: Tatum, Trae Young, Simmons, Towns, Ja Morant, Zion, Booker, Oladipo, Wall, Beal, Jimmy Butler, SGA, Siakam, and Mitchell.

I am probably forgetting a few names, but...

[youngcrev]

Who are some of the worst players you consider stars and the best players you don't? Now or ever

I'm more interested in what other people think, but for me Jrue Holiday comes to mind as one of the best non-stars in the league

Yeah, Jrue's a really good one. I also have him as "not a star" but a guy that can have a star level impact (all star level that is).

DeMar DeRozan feels like a good example of a guy on the other end of the spectrum. Certainly has the resume and aesthetic game of a star.

[ATRAIN53]

Does my kid wear his jersey or want it-

[dhsilv2]

For me, its simple. A star requires the numbers along with an All-Star selection. The All-star selection is needed because you aren't a "Star" in any walk of life if the general public doesn't recognize you as one. If a player can't even get the recognition to be voted in by the masses, they aren't a star.

I think young players can be trending towards stardom but quality players like Jrue Holiday can never be stars because they've never put up All-star numbers let alone been to an All-star game. Also too old. He's had his day. Players like this are below star level.

Holiday was an allstar and a 2x all defensive team member.

[eminence]

For me it's usually at approximately the All-NBA level, so ~15-20 guys in any one season. Sometimes a few more, sometimes a few less. Obviously wherever you draw the line there will be fringe cases. A list for this season might look like this:

LeBron
Davis
Kawhi
PG13
Jokic
Gobert
CP3
Harden
Doncic
Lillard
Giannis
Siakam
Tatum
Butler
Embiid

[dhsilv2]

Well there's certainly a "fandom" or "popularity" element to the term "star". I however think more in terms of "star impact". So in that a star is a player who can have star level impact on a teams winning and loosing or more directly point differential. Where things get tricky is if a "star" is still one if they no longer produce at that level but have the reputation as such.

So lets test the idea. There are the players with a BPM of 2 or greater.

James Harden
Giannis Antetokounmpo
LeBron James
Nikola Jokić
Anthony Davis
Damian Lillard
Luka Dončić
Kawhi Leonard
Jimmy Butler
Bam Adebayo
Chris Paul
Trae Young
Rudy Gobert
Jayson Tatum
Domantas Sabonis
Ben Simmons
Karl-Anthony Towns
Khris Middleton
Nikola Vučević
Kemba Walker
Bradley Beal
Kyle Lowry
Hassan Whiteside
Joel Embiid
Zach LaVine
Danilo Gallinari
Montrezl Harrell
Devin Booker
Jrue Holiday
Brandon Ingram
Donovan Mitchell
Steven Adams
Paul George
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander
Al Horford
Pascal Siakam

Ignoring some noise, maybe you're not into say Steven Adams for example. This is mostly the right list and the size seems reasonable, about 36 players in the 30 team league.

Then we have the well maybe we should think about it group 1.5-1.9 BPM.

DeMar DeRozan
Spencer Dinwiddie
Gordon Hayward
Kevin Love
Mitchell Robinson
Jonas Valančiūnas
Fred VanVleet
Russell Westbrook
Jarrett Allen
Nemanja Bjelica
John Collins
Buddy Hield
Christian Wood
Eric Bledsoe
Evan Fournier
Kyrie Irving
CJ McCollum
Delon Wright
LaMarcus Aldridge
Will Barton
Brandon Clarke
Tobias Harris
George Hill
Justin Holiday
DeAndre Jordan
Brook Lopez
Nerlens Noel
Marcus Smart
Daniel Theis

Here I see a lot of questionable guys, but mostly this is another list of mostly players who'd qualify as a star in terms of their ability to consistently impact games.

So I guess I'm ok going as high as about 65 stars in the league last year, which is about two players per team...exactly what you'd expect give the size and quality of the league today.

Keep in mind I am not saying BPM defines the stars or that this is the list, but that the approach and concept should produce roughly the size of players that BPM did with there being a "questionable" grouping that fits the profile in metrics but deeper analysis or common sense (no way Noel is a star) would remove some and likely we'd find a few who missed this list who are simply scored wrong.

[Drakeem]

A star is someone who's beyond a fringe all-star (lets say a Middleton), and a super start (someone like LeBron/Durant/Kawhi). They have to be a consistent shoe in for an all star, and for a consistent period of time (so not Oladipo).

These would be your Lillards, Embiids, Jimmy Butlers, etc. People who are great pieces, a fringe number 1 and preferably an incredibly strong #2 next to your superstar.

[Crizzle]

Stars, All Stars, and Super stars

Stars are fringe all star players and maybe the best non all star player in your market (speaking just as a team fan)

All stars are self explanatory

Super Stars are reserved for the legit game changers. I dont like to throw this term around. But there is so much talent in the league right now and therefore a relatively large amount of true superstars. You can have a conversation about 7-10 current players.

[kuclas]

A star is a consistent. top 25-30 nba player.

A superstar is a consistent top 5-7 nba player (consistent meaning they got to be all nba 1st or 2nd team a minimum 3 times times within the past 6 years in my opinion and or recent league mvp in the past 5 years.

So guys like lenron Giannis harden curry Anthony Davis Leonard and even Westbrook (he’s declining obviously) are the true super stars in the league.

Embiid and jokic and Lillard are not super stars. Lillard is a star. Very Close to super star. . Embiid and jokic got to do it one more year I think to be in the super star

As for “star” players not that good. Guys like Middleton holiday are where I draw the line.

[cupcakesnake]

Holiday has been getting overrated lately, he's only averaged 20ppg once in his career, is inefficient and has declined as a defender. I'm one of his biggest fans but he's not a star, he's a highly capable guard, like a more complete Spencer Dinwiddie or non-horrible Mike Conley.

I think a certain type of ball fan (myself included), falls easily in love with all-around players with few holes in their games. The idea of Jrue is just the perfect guard you could throw on any team. He can play on and off the ball, bringing just enough shooting, ball handling and passing to be a compliment to anyone, while also being able to be a standout defender with enough versatility to guard several positions.

Anyone who think Jrue is awesome on offense is overstating things. He's good enough at everything, but it might be fair to say he's average at everything. He's only okay as a finisher, shooter, ball handler, doesn't get to the line enough, very streaky from 3 etc. etc.

I don't get the comparisons you made though. "non-horrible Mike Conley" was a star level player if we're talking about his 2017 and 2019, his only healthy seasons in his late bloomer prime. Spencer Dinwiddie might be comparable to Jrue if you just look at the 20ppg 6apg thing (like it seems you did since your group of comparisons are all guys who average 20ppg and 6apg), but Dinwiddie shot 41%FG and 30% from 3. He was bad. He made up for it by being really good at getting to the line, which is something Jrue is pretty average at. Jrue is inefficient too because he doesn't get to the line, but he's fine totally adequate at hitting his shots inside the offense, Dinwiddie is not. Also Dinwiddie is a complete defensive liability, where Holiday still has the reputation of being one of the best guard defenders in the NBA. Jrue still looks pretty great on defense, and defensive metrics that are less tilted towards bigs suggest there hasn't been any drop off yet. Most catch-all metrics have Holiday in the top 50 and Dinwiddie as way outside the top 100.

[Lunartic]

Holiday has been getting overrated lately, he's only averaged 20ppg once in his career, is inefficient and has declined as a defender. I'm one of his biggest fans but he's not a star, he's a highly capable guard, like a more complete Spencer Dinwiddie or non-horrible Mike Conley.

I think a certain type of ball fan (myself included), falls easily in love with all-around players with few holes in their games. The idea of Jrue is just the perfect guard you could throw on any team. He can play on and off the ball, bringing just enough shooting, ball handling and passing to be a compliment to anyone, while also being able to be a standout defender with enough versatility to guard several positions.

Anyone who think Jrue is awesome on offense is overstating things. He's good enough at everything, but it might be fair to say he's average at everything. He's only okay as a finisher, shooter, ball handler, doesn't get to the line enough, very streaky from 3 etc. etc.

I don't get the comparisons you made though. "non-horrible Mike Conley" was a star level player if we're talking about his 2017 and 2019, his only healthy seasons in his late bloomer prime. Spencer Dinwiddie might be comparable to Jrue if you just look at the 20ppg 6apg thing (like it seems you did since your group of comparisons are all guys who average 20ppg and 6apg), but Dinwiddie shot 41%FG and 30% from 3. He was bad. He made up for it by being really good at getting to the line, which is something Jrue is pretty average at. Jrue is inefficient too because he doesn't get to the line, but he's fine totally adequate at hitting his shots inside the offense, Dinwiddie is not. Also Dinwiddie is a complete defensive liability, where Holiday still has the reputation of being one of the best guard defenders in the NBA. Jrue still looks pretty great on defense, and defensive metrics that are less tilted towards bigs suggest there hasn't been any drop off yet. Most catch-all metrics have Holiday in the top 50 and Dinwiddie as way outside the top 100.

Non-Horrible Conley, as in , better than this seasons Conley. I actually didn't look up any of the mentioned players stats, they just play similar games, above average starting guards.

As for Dinwiddie, you will notice I wrote "more complete" version, as in, a better defender and shooter. Obviously, at this point I would take Holiday over both as he is the better version of both. I would take 16-17 Conley over any of them. He was great in the playoffs against good defenses.

[planetmars]

"Star" to me feels fake. Because a "star" is just someone who's persona is bigger than their game is. Or you could use the literal definition which is someone who made an all-star game but that's tainted since that honour goes to someone on winning team or a player that's popular by the voters.

So the line is tough. I guess if you go by the all-star game.. there is the line. Even though it will be harder in the West than the East. You can throw in borderline guys.. and everyone pretty much knows who those are each year.

[Monky15]

Anyone who makes the NBA is a star Basketball player because they have a claim to fame. Obviously there is a difference between 'A' list star and a 'D' list star.

[makeready]

A-list: household names regardless of personal interest. usually only the face of the league gets to this point. Right now only Lebron, but previously Kobe, Shaq, MJ, larry bird, magic, etc
B-list: Well known by basketball fans and anyone in the local markets. Giannis, Harden, Kawhi, Luka, etc
C-list: respected but not well known by basketball fans, the "underrated" guys. Jrue, Jokic, etc
D-list: only well known within the local market. Terrence Davis, Caruso (although his meme status is pushing him up to C)
E-list / not a celeb: Not well known within the local market.

[Catchall]

I think Zach Lavine is an entry-level star. I would say the same about Devin Booker. These guys are solid scorers in the league, but they've never won anything or even made the playoffs. They're the leading players on their franchise though.

All of the top 25 players in the league would normally be considered stars.

I'm on the fence as to whether guys like Vucevic or Drummond are really stars. I've never thought of Horford as a star, though some on this board seem to think he is.

[Cavaliers2]

If the player has made multiple all star games or is named Cedi Osman

[GiannisNowitzki]

To me, a star is a player you can build a ~50-win team around. In other words, the player is good enough that teams will make other personnel decisions based on how those players will fit with the star’s game. Edit: Also, you are a marquee attraction within the league; opposing teams’ fans pay money and are looking forward to going to see you play.

In the NBA right now, these guys are stars:

LeBron, Giannis, Jokic, Doncic, Curry, Harden, Westbrook, Anthony Davis, Paul George, Leonard, Durant, Embiid, Lillard, Griffin, and Paul

Possibly stars: Tatum, Trae Young, Simmons, Towns, Ja Morant, Zion, Booker, Oladipo, Wall, Beal, Jimmy Butler, SGA, Siakam, and Mitchell.

I am probably forgetting a few names, but...

From your star list, I'm curious who else still has Blake? I personally do not. Injuries plus Detroit (lack of media interest/ promotion) IMO have diminished his status significantly. To piggyback on OP's point, my secondary question would be what factors would remove a player's star status?

[Capn'O]

Spoiler:

Well there's certainly a "fandom" or "popularity" element to the term "star". I however think more in terms of "star impact". So in that a star is a player who can have star level impact on a teams winning and loosing or more directly point differential. Where things get tricky is if a "star" is still one if they no longer produce at that level but have the reputation as such.

So lets test the idea. There are the players with a BPM of 2 or greater.

James Harden
Giannis Antetokounmpo
LeBron James
Nikola Jokić
Anthony Davis
Damian Lillard
Luka Dončić
Kawhi Leonard
Jimmy Butler
Bam Adebayo
Chris Paul
Trae Young
Rudy Gobert
Jayson Tatum
Domantas Sabonis
Ben Simmons
Karl-Anthony Towns
Khris Middleton
Nikola Vučević
Kemba Walker
Bradley Beal
Kyle Lowry
Hassan Whiteside
Joel Embiid
Zach LaVine
Danilo Gallinari
Montrezl Harrell
Devin Booker
Jrue Holiday
Brandon Ingram
Donovan Mitchell
Steven Adams
Paul George
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander
Al Horford
Pascal Siakam

Ignoring some noise, maybe you're not into say Steven Adams for example. This is mostly the right list and the size seems reasonable, about 36 players in the 30 team league.

Then we have the well maybe we should think about it group 1.5-1.9 BPM.

DeMar DeRozan
Spencer Dinwiddie
Gordon Hayward
Kevin Love
Mitchell Robinson
Jonas Valančiūnas
Fred VanVleet
Russell Westbrook
Jarrett Allen
Nemanja Bjelica
John Collins
Buddy Hield
Christian Wood
Eric Bledsoe
Evan Fournier
Kyrie Irving
CJ McCollum
Delon Wright
LaMarcus Aldridge
Will Barton
Brandon Clarke
Tobias Harris
George Hill
Justin Holiday
DeAndre Jordan
Brook Lopez
Nerlens Noel
Marcus Smart
Daniel Theis

Here I see a lot of questionable guys, but mostly this is another list of mostly players who'd qualify as a star in terms of their ability to consistently impact games.

So I guess I'm ok going as high as about 65 stars in the league last year, which is about two players per team...exactly what you'd expect give the size and quality of the league today.

Keep in mind I am not saying BPM defines the stars or that this is the list, but that the approach and concept should produce roughly the size of players that BPM did with there being a "questionable" grouping that fits the profile in metrics but deeper analysis or common sense (no way Noel is a star) would remove some and likely we'd find a few who missed this list who are simply scored wrong.

Give 'er a data check... I looked at a few guys that confused me. Kyrie's BPM was 7.7 this year. Did you do VORP? He is way down there due to injury because that stat is cumulative.

Also, Mitch is a starrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

[azcatz11]

I think Zach Lavine is an entry-level star. I would say the same about Devin Booker. These guys are solid scorers in the league, but they've never won anything or even made the playoffs. They're the leading players on their franchise though.

All of the top 25 players in the league would normally be considered stars.

I'm on the fence as to whether guys like Vucevic or Drummond are really stars. I've never thought of Horford as a star, though some on this board seem to think he is.

I agree with this re Lavine & Booker. Those are textbook entry level stars.

Drummond may have been a star but is not so anymore and Vuc was never and will never be a star.