The problem with WNBA award voting (and the discourse about it)

With heightened attention comes heightened scrutiny. And with heightened scrutiny comes real debate. It's part of the package.

Good morning. Let’s basketball.

---

Salon de Madame Geoffrin; Anicet Charles Gabriel Lemmonier; 1755

The WNBA released its Defensive Player of the Year and All-Defense team voting results on Tuesday. It became a very hot topic in some corners of the basketball internet, and for good reason.

A’ja Wilson won Defensive Player of the Year, receiving 20 out of 56 votes. The Sun’s Alyssa Thomas finished second with 14, followed by Breanna Stewart with 13 votes.

And yet Thomas ended up on second team All-Defense, with Wilson and Stewie making first team alongside center Sylvia Fowles with guards Natasha Cloud and Ariel Atkins. Thomas is a forward. Stewart is a forward. Wilson is listed as a forward but plays center. And this is how the WNBA adjudicates who is eligible at which positions.

Matt Ellentuck @mellentuck

the alyssa thomas all-defensive second team situation only happens because we're picking for positions voters had to choose two of a'ja wilson, breanna stewart and alyssa thomas for first team that's hard, and stinks because those 3 are maybe the best defensive players in the W

This isn’t a problem exclusive to the WNBA — the NBA has had the issue of the top two MVP finishers both being centers for the past two seasons, with the league getting pretty fuzzy on whether those centers are eligible at forward. The solution is loosening the structuralism of the team — either switching to three frontcourt players and two guards (though the line between guards and forwards is fuzzy too) or going positionless. Notably, the WNBA has gone positionless this season for its All-League team. One presumes this was done in anticipation of most of the top finishers and best players being frontcourt players.

Of course, the WNBA’s apparent stated rule (positions as listed on team rosters) wasn’t actually enforced given the fact that second team All-Defense features only one player listed at guard (Brittney Sykes)! With Sykes, there are three players listed at forward (AT, Ezi Magbegor [a center] and Gabby Williams) and a center (Jonquel Jones [who is listed as a forward]).

What I’m guessing happened here is that the league and enough voters decided that A’ja is a forward so not all of A’ja-Stewie-AT could make first team, but the league and enough voters were OK with Gabby Williams being considered a guard to let her slide in. The league doesn’t appear to have released voting results for All Defense. (I don’t even see a press release or story about it on the WNBA website?!) My guess is that this sleight-of-hand cost Allisha Gray a slot on second team All Defense. Then the Magbegor-Jones thing is weird and maybe a typo?

Anyway, WNBA Media Voters are left with an unraveling defense of their collective decision because the league can’t get its s—t together by setting some basic eligibility rules and sticking to them.

The other big red flag on the All Defense team is it’s distinct lack of Candace Parker. I do not consider myself a dedicated enough analyst to be worthy of a WNBA awards vote (NBA either, for the record). But anyone who watches the Sky a few times can see it.

Nekias (Nuh-KY-us) Duncan @NekiasNBA

We're going to put some respect on Candace Parker's name today. Here are just *two minutes* of what she did this year. Hedges, in a drop, late switches, post defending, iso defending, nail help, timely doubles, weakside rotations. She did it all, and should be recognized.

By the way: you should check out Nekias Duncan’s piece on the voting and who he’d have on his ballot, if he had one.

There’s an additional big problem overall, and not exclusive to DPOY voting. It’s apparent in all the major awards the WNBA has released so far, and it will probably be a problem for the MVP award (assuming that ballot looks the same as these other individual awards). And that is that instead of asking for voters’ first, second and third place finishers for these awards and assigning proportional points, the WNBA only asks for voters’ top choice.

That’s pretty crazy!

If you’re a voter who has Wilson and Thomas, for example, neck and neck for DPOY with Stewart a distant third, and you select Wilson, there is no way in which your preference for AT over Stewart is recorded. In the odd, rare case where there is unanimity on an award — think Steph Curry in 2015-16 — you would have no second place finisher, no runner-up. Pretty weird. It would cost the WNBA and its voting panel nothing to do a 5-3-1 points system with 1-2-3 ballots for the individual awards. The NBA does 1-2-3-4-5 for MVP and 1-2-3 for everything else. It allows additional recognition for more players, strengths the results by making distinctions between non-winners and may reduce the pressure on voters to make odd selections with a single vote.

The other thing worth discussing here is that conversation — even somewhat angry conversation — about WNBA award voting is Actually Good. It’s great that people care enough to get aggravated by what they see as goofy voting by the media granted ballots or a goofy process by the league. It’s great that the discourse is about Parker and Thomas getting snubbed, or this-or-that team having such a bad defense that no one from the roster should be recognized. Discourse drives engagement, engagement drives interest, interest drives further engagement with the product, etc.

You cannot want the WNBA to grow in popularity and resources while at the same time being completely allergic to open and honest debate about the players, teams, awards and everything else. Some media members on Tuesday appeared to bristle at the general critiques of voting decisions, even though everything is anonymous. But if you made defensible choices, you shouldn’t need to feel defensive. Make the case!

The same applies to players and team/league employees who have in the recent past been really combative with WNBA media members who try to report on the inner workings of the league and its teams. If you want the revenue pie to grow, you need more media coverage of the league. Period. Attention is our currency. Teams should be completely open and inviting to media coverage. Players should maintain reasonable boundaries, but keep in mind that media members aren’t trying to ruin teams or careers or anything. They are doing their jobs getting information fans want. It can’t always be positive! Release the grip just a bit and let the ecosystem thrive.

This isn’t an argument for the NBA-ification of the WNBA, where the offseason takes priority of interest over the actual season, where off-court material drowns out the games all too often. There’s a spectrum. The WNBA and its stakeholders could do a better job allowing natural growth of interest to occur by opening its door a bit wider.

Part of that is for WNBA-focused media to stop gatekeeping debate about the actual on-court play.

Anyways, that’s my two cents as a casual.

---