RealGM

Another thread was talking about role players and the players mentioned ranged from Kobe Bryant (playing with Shaq) to Bruce Bowen . . .
so I wanted to know, what is a roleplayer?

Three possible definitions:

(1) A player who plays less than 30 minutes (or 33 or whatever) a game
(2) A non-scorer, ie someone who scores less than 15 ppg (or 20 . . . )
(3) A player with basically one primary skill (pure shooter like Dell Curry, pure defender like Bruce Bowen, pure rebounder like Reggie Evans)

How do you define roleplayer?

3 but not limited to 1 and 2

I don't think there's 1 definition of what a role player is, in the same way there isn't a plain/simple definition for what a superstar is.

a role player would be somebody who has a specific role to play or job to perform in a team during games. it could be to rebound, or create for other people, or spot 3 point shooter, and so on, but not neccessarily limited to one skill as long he exels at his specific task in the game.

the best example is Bowen- his tasks are shut down the other teams best player and in the offense to go to the corners and shoot 3s.

I've always divided non-stars into two groups. Role players and glue guys.

These might not be the right descriptions but here's what makes sense to me. A role player is a guy who does one thing very well, a shooter, a banger, a perimeter stopper etc. A glue guy is usually a vet or a smart player who does a little bit of everything and helps to make those around them better. A lot of times guys are a bit of both, but usually you can seperate one from the other.

penbeast0 wrote:Another thread was talking about role players and the players mentioned ranged from Kobe Bryant (playing with Shaq) to Bruce Bowen . . .
so I wanted to know, what is a roleplayer?

Three possible definitions:

(1) A player who plays less than 30 minutes (or 33 or whatever) a game
(2) A non-scorer, ie someone who scores less than 15 ppg (or 20 . . . )
(3) A player with basically one primary skill (pure shooter like Dell Curry, pure defender like Bruce Bowen, pure rebounder like Reggie Evans)

How do you define roleplayer?

Hmm... these definitions do not convince me and there are many others possible. Hence IMHO the best way is negative definition: role player is someone who isn't a star. OK, it's only exchanging one problem for another cause who exactly is a star? For my own use I like narrow definition: it's generally someone with multiple/consecutive All-Star appearance. Unless there's a good reason to believe that either non All-Star was a real star (IMO prime Rodman as DPOY was one, despite being regularly snubbed as to ASG) or annual ASG participant wasn't the one (I can't think of an example off the top of my head, maybe will add some later).
And all non-stars are role players. Simple as that.

A player who knows his role

Numero tres.

So, for those who say number 3 . . . . is Michael Redd (or even Allen Iverson) a role player?

The glue guy differentiation is interesting but can't a glue guy be a role player particularly if the one skill is defense?

The non-superstar (usually described as non-primary scorer) definition seems to be the main one . . . I'll go with that for the moment when I read threads, thanks.

Not necessarily because Redd and Iverson are elite scorers. Scoring is the most invaluable asset in the league. There is a plethora of rebounders, passers, defenders, etc., but scorers are few and none.

The problem is that a superstar on one team could be a role player on another.
Usually this happens when a plethora of talent is assembled to the same team (e.g. Team USA), but in scenarios when a Big Three or Fantastic Duo form, somebody's role is downgraded, and sometimes both are.

A scorer may be asked to distribute. A passer may be asked to shoot more. A defender may be asked to take up a leadership role. and so on.

I do tend to lean towards a glue-guy/role-player specification, as well. Shane Battier is a glue-guy. Bruce Bowen is a role-player. Shane Battier has a limited skill-set (i.e. he is neither great nor bad at anything) but could be used by any team, whereas Bruce Bowen would not excel on a team that had perimeter defenders already and/or did not rely on the corner three.

Its kinda hard to explain when I think about it. You have your leaders, then you have your supporting cast. I think the supporting cast would be your role players obviously. A team like Boston would have your leaders in KG, Pierce, and Allen, while the rest of the team would act as their role players.

You can have co-leaders on a team. Those are pretty much the players who have no problems taking things in their hands and making things happen. While your role players just know their role and support them based on their skill. At least thats how I would describe it. ^^;

my definition:
basketball requires more overall skills than just one role like football
quarterback -- passing
runningback -- run fast
wide receiver -- catch
well you get the point
those that lack the overall skills (passing, shooting, dribbling, etc) are consider role players

Everyone is a role player. Superstars' role is to carry his team. JVG said that some players just have bigger roles like Kobe, Lebron.

#3 or 0 stats contributor


Like Madsen hustler

A player that's good at one specific aspect of the game. If your good at scoring but bad in everything else, I consider you a role player. I guess my definition of a role player is similar to my definition of a specialist.

TAI8 wrote:Not necessarily because Redd and Iverson are elite scorers. Scoring is the most invaluable asset in the league. There is a plethora of rebounders, passers, defenders, etc., but scorers are few and none.

In the immortal words of Charles Barkley, "Any fool can score!" The key is to score in a way that helps your team, otherwise you end up like Derrick Gervin averaging over 25 pts per 40 minutes but cut after a season and a half out of disgust at the fact that he chucked everything he ever touched and never worked at defense.

Lots of guys were scorers that have evolved into role players, volume scoring without efficiency is the most overrated stat in the game; scoring efficiency is the scoring stat that correlates most highly with winning. Now, if all you care about is getting press, sure . . . gunners are great.

Everyone in the league can score, but only a select few can create their own shot off the dribble consistently.

Allen Iverson was a 30 PPG scorer in Philly and shot with horrendous efficiency from the field, but he was MVP and took his team to the Finals.

Michael Redd was a 21-27 PPG scorer and took his team to the playoffs several times.

The aforementioned players are unquestionably superstar/star players. They are/were the face of their respective franchises.