All-Star flaws for voting system


Photo credit: Creative Commons

The National Basketball Association’s all-star voting system still has major flaws despite revisions implemented this year.

This year’s voting system was changed to accurately select the association’s all-stars, showcasing the best players in the league rather than the mockery of a popularity contest it has become. The new voting system now comprises of three votes; the fans who make up 50 percent of the vote, selected media reporters, and the players themselves.

Reducing the fan vote ensured that the popularity contest, that was the all-star game, kept out players like Golden State Warrior Zaza Pachulia, who finished second in the fan vote, but does not play on an all-star level.

Giving selected media votes helps reduce the skewed fan votes, but the addition of player votes proved to be a waste.

Rather than giving players insight on where they rank their peers, players took it upon themselves to vote for themselves and friends.

A player like Mo Williams, who has not played a single minute of the 2016-2017 season received a player vote which could have gone to a more deserving Boston Celtic Isiah Thomas, who has been playing on a MVP like level.

What the association should have taken into consideration is that players will always think highly of themselves and their peers. Natural human intuition will always place oneself over their competitors.

The biggest all-star snub was Oklahoma City Thunder Russel Westbrook, who was ranked number one in both the media and player voting but finished third in the fan vote. The selected starter over him was Stephen Curry who finished first in the fan vote, but third in both the media and player voting. Curry winning the fan votes pushed him past Westbrook for the starting spot.

The voting system is flawed, and could still be revised to avoid snubs like Westbrook. While the event itself is for the fans, the event has lost its competitiveness because of the popularity contest it has become.