Is Melo really most underrated?

Some players are reluctant to characterize themselves as the best, worst, most or least of anything. Coming from a player, superlatives are a no-win situation: They come across as either too boastful or indignant.

However, recently several players weren't afraid to declare themselves with superlatives. Russell Westbrook agreed with an assessment that he was the best point guard in the league. Carmelo Anthony said he was the most underrated superstar, while Dion Waiters proclaimed that he and Kyrie Irving are the best backcourt tandem in the NBA.

Did our experts agree? Insiders Amin Elhassan and Kevin Pelton take this trio to task.

No. 1: Is Carmelo Anthony the NBA's most underrated superstar?

Elhassan: Any time you talk about under- or overrated, you are talking about a nebulous concept based on the court of public opinion. How does one define how a player is "rated"? And by whom?

But if we ignore that truth and play along, it's not a stretch to say that Anthony has experienced the full circle of player rating. At some point earlier in his career, Melo was overrated: a volume scorer who wasn't terribly efficient and didn't add much else in the way of passing, rebounding or defense, and yet was praised as the same caliber of talent as fellow draft classmates LeBron James and Dwyane Wade.

However, one of the funny things about being overrated is when public opinion catches up, it often swings the pendulum too far in the other direction, and so as Anthony's game has improved over the last few seasons (markedly better efficiency and shot selection, greatly improved rebounding, more of an effort to create for others, passable effort on defense), the court of public opinion has stuck to the image of Melo, the inefficient jacker, lending credence that he is in fact underrated. As I wrote last spring, the triangle offense will help Melo become a quicker attacking, more complete offensive weapon who does not need to dominate touches.

Still, I can't call Melo the most underrated superstar. From Anthony Davis to Stephen Curry to Tony Parker, there are several other elite players who get a lot less adulation (not to mention pay) than Anthony does.

Pelton: The short answer is no, because he's not Kyle Lowry.

Last year, Lowry (14.4) ranked just ahead of Anthony (14.3) in wins above replacement player (WARP) by my system. His advantage was much larger in terms of ESPN's real plus-minus, where Lowry (21st) ranked 32 spots ahead of Anthony (53rd). Yet Lowry wasn't even an All-Star, and while Anthony was taking a small pay cut to re-sign with the New York Knicks for $124 million over five years, Lowry got barely more than a third of that guaranteed salary (four years, $48 million). So it's pretty hard to argue that Anthony is underrated vis-à-vis Lowry.

The long answer is I don't think that's really what Melo is saying. He's really calling himself the most maligned superstar in the NBA, and that's a much stronger case. The focus on what Anthony does poorly detracts from the fact that he's added efficiency to his volume scoring and has consistently been a part of good offensive teams. You can absolutely build a contending team around Carmelo, and the Knicks' inability to do so last season doesn't indicate otherwise. Still, most underrated? That's a hard case to make.

No. 2: Is Russell Westbrook the league's best point guard?

Elhassan: Perhaps in a few years we'll be asking whether Westbrook is under- or overrated. He's an incredible talent, and unquestionably one of the top 10 players in the game; Oklahoma City is undoubtedly a better team when he plays. He might be the most athletically gifted guy to ever play the point guard position, and defenders are often left at the mercy of the bounce of the ball (in other words, if he misses, you had little to do with it). On TrueHoop TV Live, I said if Westbrook were the focal point of a team such as the Sixers, he'd turn in one of the great individual statistical seasons of recent memory (along the lines of Tracy McGrady during Orlando's low points of supporting casts).

The problem is, there's a difference between being "the best player at point guard" and "the best point guard." Being a point guard carries with it a special set of prerequisites, among them an ability to game manage: knowledge of time and score and making appropriate decisions according to the situation; keeping teammates happy, confident and feeling involved; recognition of mismatches and exploiting them; recognition of the great shot someone else has over the good shot you have. Even the most fervent Westbrook supporter has to acknowledge that in those categories, Westbrook does not grade as well as some of the other marquee players at the position. So while he's a tremendous talent at point guard, I can't call him the best point guard.

Pelton: Nope. As it has been for at least a half-decade, it's Chris Paul. While not the same kind of athlete, Paul can do almost everything Westbrook does, plus he's a superior playmaker and much more sure-handed with the basketball. The only real case against Paul statistically is his lack of durability. He's missed an average of 13 games over the last three seasons, while Westbrook had never sat out due to injury before tearing the meniscus in his right knee during the 2013 playoffs. At some point, as the gap between them on a per-minute basis closes, that might be enough for Westbrook to surpass Paul. But not yet.

No. 3: Are Dion Waiters and Kyrie Irving the best backcourt in the game?

Elhassan:This is easily the most laughable claim made on media day. Before the state of Ohio logs onto Twitter to ask why I "hate" Cleveland, let me say that I like both Kyrie Irving and Dion Waiters as individual and collective talents. But for Waiters to be the one to proudly proclaim the Cavs have the best backcourt in the league would be akin to Kim Kardashian saying that she and Kanye West are the most talented couple in entertainment: Sure, one of the two of you might be on an elite level, but it sure as heck isn't you!

There's nothing Waiters has done on his résumé that should give him even a smidge of confidence to make that statement: He's inefficient from the field, doesn't get to the free throw line often (despite being a power guard), doesn't convert at a good rate from the stripe, is an ineffectual defender and (perhaps most damning) didn't even get along with Irving! Again, this isn't meant as a knock to Waiters as a talent. I think he has the tools to be a very good combo guard in this league, and playing alongside LeBron James and Kevin Love will work wonders for his game.

As far as who the best backcourt is, I wrote about this a month ago: The Clippers have the most complete backcourt in the league, and second place is a fight between the Warriors, Wizards and Suns. Waiters might want to wait until he sees .500 past the first week of the season before he starts spouting superlatives.

Pelton: Ha. Let's work on Irving and Waiters being an average backcourt before they start putting themselves in the discussion for the best in the NBA, because they weren't last year. Waiters ranked 24th in RPM with a slightly below-average rating (minus-0.1 points per 100 possessions). And he was the better of the two players! Irving's defense is so abysmal that he rated 1.4 points per 100 possessions worse than an average player.

Since Irving and Waiters both are just 22, we can expect they'll improve. In particular, Irving's defense figures to be much better after a summer spent playing for Tom Thibodeau with USA Basketball. His offensive skill is unquestioned, and Waiters' excellent catch-and-shoot track record bodes well for his ability to play with the Cavaliers' new star-studded lineup. For now, however, Cleveland's guards don't belong in the discussion with teams such as the Golden State Warriors, Houston Rockets, L.A. Clippers and Phoenix Suns that combine one All-Star player with another solid starter.