Attempts to categorize NBA players based on abilities never really end. Outside of the obvious designations of on-court function (e.g.: a player who takes mostly jump-shots is labeled a jump-shooter), fans have expended endless energy ruminating over how to slot players based on their importance to the team.  Straying from the rather silly squabbles over whether Joe Johnson is really a superstar or just an All-Star, for example, there?s a divide between stars and role players, often with an accompanying belief that each and every player must either be one or the other. Sometimes, there will be vague designations like ?second scorer? or just strange ones like ?third option on a first-round exit team, but only when that team is eliminated in Game Six on its home court by between eight and ten points?, but these are rarely helpful.

Technically, every player is a role player, simply because every player is on the court for a specific reason. Even the best players in the league ? let?s start with Tim Duncan, LeBron James, and Kobe Bryant for some concrete examples ? play within their roles on their teams. Sometimes, that role will be to dominate the ball, and other times it will be to facilitate teammates? opportunities. Still others, it will be to collect a key rebound or to block a shot. They aren?t viewed as role players, though. Neither are many of the other players who do whatever is necessary to make their teams win.

Logically, it follows that a role player must have some sort of limitation. The idea that anyone other than a go-to scorer is a role player is fallacious, though. Consider players renowned for not being superstars (again, whatever that means) but who perform so many different functions on the court that they hardly seem limited at all ? for example, Andre Iguodala or Al Horford. No one is about to start a franchise based on either, or any player of similar ability, but relegating them to the status of role player is foolish. Neither is the focus of the other team?s defense (Elton Brand and the aforementioned Joe Johnson can enjoy that distinction), but teams have to plan for them on both sides of the ball.

My definition of a role player is simple: it is a player who performs a specific function, primarily on one side of the ball but also performs adequately in other areas to not be a specialist. A role player will usually not be the go-to guy on offense or defense but can be and can hypothetically stay on the court anywhere from four minutes to forty. (For players with endurance or foul problems, this is metaphorical.) The different ways in which players can impact the game are so numerous that it?s easy to forget just how diverse many players? games are.

A Defensive Player, Not a Role Player

Defensive standouts who either don?t score enough or who don?t do it in flashy enough ways are often improperly classified as role players. Fans, commentators and coaches alike will often mention how many ways a player can score: he can shoot from mid-range, shoot from three, penetrate and finish, penetrate for a pull-up jumper, do any number of things back to the basket? yet as many ways as there are to score, there are just as many ways to stop someone. Man perimeter defense, stealing, taking charges, man post defense, and shot blocking are all considerably different skills. A player who can, say, play man perimeter defense, take charges, and block shots is the defensive equivalent of a player who can score from anywhere on the outside, draw fouls, and crash the bucket for tip-ins. Take a few examples of defensive players who have games that are far more diverse than the role player allegations they receive realize:

Gerald Wallace: Albeit only improperly labeled on occasion, Gerald Wallace is best known for his defense. He can block shots and steal the ball (averaged over two of each in his best season in that regard), and he gets to the defensive glass on a consistent basis. His man perimeter defense, while only above average, is still a good enough reason to keep him on the floor. He also has his uses on offense, being able to use the same athleticism and timing that lets him force turnovers easily while he?s cutting to the bucket. His passing is competent for his position,  too.

Udonis Haslem: Haslem is a player who receives the role player designation on a frequent basis, but his play disproves this nearly every time he steps on the court. He?s known for his defense, and rightfully so, but even that?s not only one skill. Haslem is quick and lean enough at about 6?8? and 230 pounds to be able to stop perimeter-oriented power forwards, like the admirable job he did on Dirk Nowitzki in the 2006 NBA Finals, but he?s also been asked to guard opposing centers this season and has held his ground. His lack of blocked shots is more attributable to his refusal to fall for pump-fakes than to any deficiency. He?s a good rebounder, can put up double-figures on mid-range jump-shots, sets good screens, and was the third best player on the Heat?s championship squad. He?ll never be a team?s first option on offense, but he does far too much on the court to possibly be a role player.

The Opposite Scenario: When a Leading Scorer Is a Role Player

Scoring is a role. If defense is merely one area a player can do, so is offense. More specifically, many scorers devote themselves almost entirely to the offensive side of the ball but aren?t good enough rebounders or facilitators to have all-around games. These players are valuable to teams, much like defensive role players like Bruce Bowen and DeSagana Diop are valuable. They get paid more, if only because they have uncommon skill sets, and they?re great stadium draws.

Michael Redd: Redd came into the league as a defensively-oriented shooter, but times have changed, and so has he. Routinely putting up twenty-plus points, Redd often does little else. His defense hasn?t improved; he hovers around four rebounds per game despite playing massive minutes, and he doesn?t get the kind of assist per turnover ratio that you?d like to see in a guard making an average of $16 million per year over the course of his six-year contract. This isn?t to bash Redd: he?s a very useful player who?s found a niche in this league, and many teams would be salivating to have him starting at the two. He can slash and shoot, taking him out of specialist territory, but he?s a role player. He?s too narrowly focused to be otherwise. It?s not a slight; it?s how he plays.

Tracy McGrady (Orlando edition): This is something of a controversial placement for a player who was once lauded as top-ten in the league, but it?s an important point for that very reason. No matter how good a player is, that player can be a role player, in the same way that an end-of-bencher can be all-around. McGrady faced some tough love in Toronto and Houston under Butch Carter and Jeff van Gundy respectively, and it served him well; he looked for his teammates, he forced turnovers, and he got up on his man. Ironically, by placing the most focus on him than he?s ever received, Orlando made him into a role player for his four years there, especially near the end. In 2004, as the Magic were spiraling toward oblivion (and, as its silver lining, Dwight Howard), Brent Barry made a biting comment about McGrady. He said that McGrady was ?a great scorer, but that?s it?. McGrady can score in every way imaginable, but when his abilities in other facets of the game aren?t utilized, that?s all he?s capable of doing. This should be a lesson to every player angling for a high-scoring career: being able to do other things, whether through talent, motivation, or surrounding players and coaches, is paramount? unless you?re fine with being a one-dimensional player on a struggling team.

When a Player Goes Two Ways: The Exact Opposite of a Role Player

This section shouldn?t even be necessary, but sadly it is. Since LeBron James has come into the league, fans have described the Cavaliers as LeBron James and no one else or LeBron James and a bunch of role players. This is so far off-base that I won?t comment on it too extensively. Whenever discussing the utility of non-LeBron Cavaliers, though, the discussion should really start and end with one name:

Zydrunas Ilgauskas: When LeBron came out in the media recently and said that Ilgauskas?s #11 will hang in the rafters, he said it for a reason. Sure, the team appears to be having its best chemistry ever amid reports of team get-togethers in the shower area, but players don?t just say things that lofty about their friends. Ilgauskas can post up, shoot from anywhere (if you don?t believe me, check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wwl5kUxreGU), set screens, hit the offensive glass, alter shots in the lane, block shots on his man, play man post defense? pretty much everything a 7?3? behemoth can possibly do without being Shaquille O?Neal. Ilgauskas is also nearing the Cavaliers? franchise rebound record despite not even being known for his rebounding. He only averages about fifteen points on any given season as the second option in the Cavs? offense, but his game has virtually no limitations.

So Who Is a Role Player, Who Isn?t, and Why?

The commonly-proffered distinction between a role player and a star, or the idea that a role player has to have less talent than a star, simply doesn?t stack up to the variety of skill sets visible in the NBA. There are so many ways to win a game, and so many ways to dominate, that there?s no one way for a player to achieve star status. In a league featuring all kinds of offensive sets, defensive formations, and coaching strategies, being a team?s first option on offense or leading scorer doesn?t immediately exclude a player from role-player eligibility. Conversely, not being predicated on scoring doesn?t ensure that a player is a role player. If Michael Redd isn?t hitting shots, he becomes significantly less useful, but if Udonis Haslem is playing sub-par defense, he can still stick jumpers all night. There?s no black and white in the NBA; it?s a spectrum, and finding the right combination of players on that spectrum is what propels teams to success. Often times, whether a player is a role player is as much as product of his environment as it is of his own skills. The opposite of a role player, then, isn?t necessarily a star at all: it?s a player with a versatile, all-around game.