Tuesday, March 15th, 2011 at 11:00 am  |  16 responses
Top 20: Tamika Catchings, no. 2

The definitive ranking of the WNBA’s best players.

by Ben York / @bjyork

Some of you won’t care, and we’re about 99 percent positive we’ll get a
few of the traditional “what is the WNBA?” comments we usually do. But this
is long overdue – SLAMonline’s first ever in-depth player rankings for the
WNBA.

Why just the top 20 and not the top 50? Simple. There are 18 fewer teams in
the WNBA than the NBA and roster sizes are limited to 11 players. Thus, the
NBA has hundreds of more players than the WNBA does – and this list needs
and deserves to be competitive.

This list is based solely on projected performance in the 2011 season.
Traditional player statistics are taken into account but being a successful
and effective player in The W is so much more than that. It’s what each
player means to the team – in terms of responsibility, leadership,
management and all-around game.

We know you’ll see players you think should be on the list but aren’t.
Conversely, you’ll also see players on the list that you’ll vehemently
disagree with. Maybe you agree with the entire top 20. Just be sure to let us
know in the comment section.

Also, check out Ben’s weekly podcast at WNBA.com.– Ed.

No. 2 – Tamika Catchings

When I first sat down and began creating SLAMonline’s WNBA Top 20 list back
in October of 2010, I already knew who the top three players would be. After
all, if you take into account the accomplishments that Lauren Jackson, Tamika
Catchings, and Diana Taurasi have all made (and continue to make) to women’s
basketball, combined with the momentum each player created heading into the
2011 season, there’s not much of a debate.

The part I wasn’t sure of, however, was where each player would fall within
those three spots.

As I mentioned on this week’s podcast with WNBA.com, each of those players
(Jackson, Catchings, and Taurasi) occupied the the No. 1 spot at some point.
Every time I felt good about putting Lauren Jackson there, I’d uncover
something that propelled Catchings into that spot. Conversely, every time
Catchings wound up at No. 1, I would find an unbelievable stat regarding
Diana Taurasi which (as I’m sure you’ve guessed by now) cemented her
position at the top.

It was a vicious, cruel cycle. For weeks, I was immersed in a downward
spiral; I suffered from chronic insomnia, hallucinations, and began to look
eerily similar to Christian Bale in The Machinist.

Okay, maybe it wasn’t that dramatic but what I’m trying to say is that you
really can’t go wrong with the order of the top three; a legitimate case
could be made for every one of these players to be No. 1 and it just depends
on the value you place on certain aspects of their game. But, that’s the
beauty of it, right? We’ve been talking extensively about WNBA basketball
from October through March (a time where the NFL and NBA reign) and that’s
pretty awesome.

As for my decision to put Tamika Catchings at No. 2, it wasn’t simply that
her game has zero weaknesses but also that she is profoundly efficient and
excels in, literally, all areas of the game of basketball.

There isn’t another player in the entire league who can justifiably make
that claim. To be proficient in multiple areas is one thing, but to actually
excel and be amongst the league leaders in all areas is another.

In previous years, the one knock against Catchings (fair or unfair) has been
her shooting. Prior to 2010, her highest career shooting percentage was 43%
and that was during her second year in the league (2003). In 2010, however,
she set a career-high in both shooting percentage (48%) and three-point
percentage (45%).

Now, consider this: Tamika Catchings is the only player in WNBA history to
rank in the top ten in scoring, rebounding, assists, steals, and blocks in
the same season.

And, she has managed to do this twice.

The only category which she has not consistently ranked in the top ten is
minutes per game (her career average is 33.2). Do you realize how significant
that is? For a player to be in the top ten of so many categories (I’ll talk
more about her defensive prowess later on) and not be amongst the league
leaders in minutes per game is extraordinary.

For comparisons sake, in both the WNBA and NBA, the vast majority of players
who currently lead the league in a specific statistical category also are in
the top ten in minutes played.

Which leads me into how efficient of a player she is…

Of the top six candidates in MVP voting in 2010 (Catchings, Jackson,
McCoughtry, Taurasi, Pondexter, and Fowles) the only player who took fewer
shots than Catchings was Sylvia Fowles. Additionally, of the six candidates,
only Pondexter and Fowles shot a higher field-goal percentage and nobody shot
a higher three-point percentage than Catchings. She also posted a 22.4
efficiency rating (3rd in the league) and, of the six candidates, only Fowles
posted a higher rating (24.4). This is especially important when you consider
that Catchings posted these numbers in the Fever’s offense. Unlike any of
the other candidates, Catchings plays a considerable amount of time outside
the paint and usually ends up creating her own shot from the perimeter;
Fowles and Jackson usually get isolations, Taurasi and McCoughtry put up more
shots with more specifically designed plays, and Pondexter has the ball in
her hand 90% of the time in the Liberty’s offense.

So, what conclusion can we draw from this information?

Quite simply, nobody does more for her team than Tamika Catchings.

Nobody.

In her nine seasons in the league, Catchings has finished in the top five of
MVP voting eight times. Perhaps more significantly, she has finished in the
top three five times.

Think about that for a moment…

Think of how consistent of a player you have to be, especially on teams that
aren’t considered to be legitimate contenders, to finish in the top three of
MVP voting five times. It’s no secret that the player who typically leads
the league in scoring usually ends up being favored to win the MVP award. For
Catchings, though, it’s a bit different. Not only do the Fever rely on her
to put points on the board, she exerts an enormous amount of energy on the
defensive end of the floor guarding the opposing team’s best player (which
can be anyone from a point guard to a center).

In fact, of all the MVP candidates in 2010 (other than Catchings), if they
ranked in the top ten in one defensive category, none of them ranked in at
least the top twenty of another. For example, Catchings finished the 2010
season 1st in steals and 11th in blocks. The closest candidate to rank in the
top 20 for both was Angel McCoughtry who finished 3rd in steals and 25th in
blocks. Catchings also led the league in both defensive win shares (3.1) and
defensive rating (91.4). As another testament to her all-around game, her
offensive rating (117.1) was good for 7th in the league and her offensive win
shares (4.8) put her at 3rd in the league.

Knowing this, it would be insane to think Tamika Catchings isn’t going to
produce another record-setting year in 2011. Albert Einstein’s definition of
insanity (doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different
results) summarizes my point perfectly; Catchings has been posting ridiculous
numbers every year she has been in the league – why should 2011 be any
different?

***

What does this all mean?

It means that in 2011, there is little reason to doubt that Catchings will
have another phenomenal year. In all likelihood, she could very well capture
an unprecedented fifth Defensive Player of the Year award while continuing to
improve offensively, adding to her unrivaled versatility.

If this trend continues, Catchings could be unstoppable. Just think if
Catchings took as many shots as Taurasi or Jackson; she would easily score 20
points a game to go along with her typical six or seven rebounds and three or
four assists (not to mention two or three steals)…in just 30 minutes of
action!

In my opinion, I wouldn’t be surprised if Catchings could find herself
ranked in the top three of both offensive and defensive rating in 2011. Am I
the only one who sees how spectacular that could be? Should that happen (and
it’s definitely attainable), it would be a crime for her not to be named the
Most Valuable Player.

No weaknesses.




http://www.slamonline.com/online/other-ballers/womens/2011/03/top-20-tamika-catchings-no-2/