The art of power ranking NBA players is far from an exact science.
The simple concept of uncovering any sort of official order for the world's greatest talents in the world's greatest game is highly subjective. Grading scales differ. Judging criteria rest solely in the hands of the ranking class.
One person may prefer proven production and traditional stat lines. Another might be a card-carrying member of the analytical school or place more value on potential than past performances.
The powers that be over at ESPN, or at least a crew of writers from ESPN.com and the TrueHoop Network, undertook the daunting task of ranking the league's best players from No. 500 to No. 1. The resulting NBA Rank is this group's collection of the game's greatest stars judged on, in ESPN's words, the "overall level of play for each player for the upcoming NBA season."
If that isn't vague enough for you, the grading criteria seem to differ over the course of the list. Injuries seem to hamper some stars more than others. Some players get a boost from their potential, while others apparently have to prove their worth.
For those reasons (and many more), there are arguments to be made about a number of this crew's selections. Thanks to the powers that be at Bleacher Report, I'll be the fortunate one to put a voice to those arguments.