Connect with us

Sports

‘The Basketball 100’ GOAT Points: A new way to look at the greatest (players) of all time

Published

on

‘The Basketball 100’ GOAT Points: A new way to look at the greatest (players) of all time

“The Basketball 100” is the definitive ranking of the 100 greatest NBA players of all time from The Athletic’s team of award-winning writers and analysts, including veteran columnists David Aldridge and John Hollinger. This excerpt is reprinted from the book, which also features a foreword by Hall of Famer Charles Barkley.

“The Basketball 100” is available today. Read David Aldridge’s introduction and all of the excerpts here.


How do you rank the greatest players in history?

With great difficulty, would be my answer. Attempting to rank the best players in history from one to 100 for this book was impossible, especially when asked to compare between different roles, different positions, and different eras. How the heck are we supposed to split hairs between Ricky Barry and Dwyane Wade, the 26th- and 27th-ranked players on The Athletic’s list?

Well, that’s where data can help us. Or at least, if we use it well, it can help refine and improve our thought process for making the list. There is no ultimate truth here, no one correct and final answer. But for a sport that has been uniquely awful at preserving and discussing its history, it seems that developing a framework for the discussion might be a good place to start.

Advertisement

So how do we make a list of the best players of all time? There are some questions that I think should guide this. That perhaps, if pondered more deeply, might produce a bit less of the reflexive leaning toward secondary players on great teams that has plagued most “best-of” historical lists I’ve seen, including those by the league.

Let’s start here: If we’re covering more than 75 years worth of players, more or less, and only naming 100, that’s basically only one player a year. I get that most good players play for 10 to 20 years, but still, their prime seasons don’t encompass that whole span. (Except LeBron, you freak.) Only three players in history have been First Team All-NBA more than 10 times; only 20 did it more than five times.

The Basketball 100

The story of the greatest players in NBA history. In 100 riveting profiles, top basketball writers justify their selections and uncover the history of the NBA in the process.

The story of the greatest plays in NBA history.

Advertisement

BuyBuy The Basketball 100

Do the math: split 100 half-decade-long “peak primes” across 75 years and you get fewer than seven players a year; do the same with a decade-long prime and you get three. Any way you slice it, the bar for this list is pretty darned high.

Work backward, and one of the first gates for considering somebody for the top-100 list is: was this guy ever considered one of the 10 best players in the league?

That’s just the cover charge to get in the door. To really crack the list, you probably want to answer yes to the next question. Was this guy ever considered one of the five best players? It’s amazing how many players made the NBA’s list for whom those questions are, at best, iffy.

Or look at it another way: through the 2022–23 season, 72 players had made First Team All-NBA at least twice. That includes virtually all of the shoo-in types on the top 100, as well as some great players who didn’t quite make the list (it also includes Max Zaslofsky and Bob Feerick, but I digress).

Those two questions above are not the only valid ones, of course. There are a lot of related questions that should be part of the discussion, especially if we’re ranking players from one to 100.

In particular, if we’re talking about the cream of the cream, I would propose the following outline of important questions. (This cribs heavily from Bill James’s work in the 1985 Baseball Abstract, a dog-eared copy of which still lines my office bookshelf.)

Advertisement
  • Was he the best player in the league? Did anyone, at any point, suggest that he might be the best player in the league?
  • Did he win MVP? Did he factor heavily in MVP races?
  • Was he the best player in the league at his position?
  • Was he ever voted First Team All-NBA?

What about Second Team?

  • How many All-NBA–caliber seasons did he have?
  • Was he the best player on his team?
  • If he wasn’t the best player on his team, was he at least the second-best player on a team with a clear all-time great as the best player?
  • Was he ever the best player on a champion? Is it likely that this player could be the best player on a championship team?
  • Did he have a major impact on the postseason, beyond just lucking into being on the same team as Magic Johnson or LeBron James? Did he have a greater impact on games played at the highest level?
  • Was he good enough to be an impact player past his prime or was his career over at 30?
  • How many All-Star–caliber seasons did he have?
  • Was he a fixture on the All-Star team? And, um, not because of fan voting?
  • Do players with similar advanced stats get consideration in the top 100?
  • Is there any evidence that he was significantly better or worse than his stats?
  • Is there evidence that he was significantly better or worse than contemporaries voted in awards?

As a 16th item, I’ll note that we should value the opinion of the contemporaries who were watching these players in the ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s, when most of us couldn’t . . . either because we weren’t alive yet or because the games were only televised locally, if at all. Additionally, the statistical record from this era just isn’t nearly as complete. Like it or not, the eye test matters quite a bit for that era.

You might look at these questions and think, know what would be great? It would be cool if someone had a formula to weigh these accomplishments and rank players by where they stood. Well, funny you should ask. In the process of making my own list for The Athletic’s Basketball 100 project, I developed a formula to help guide my process.

That formula is called GOAT points, which stands for . . . Greatest Of All Time, duh. I don’t have some funky alternative abbreviation, sorry, nor have I found an obscure backup center to name this after. (Someday I will create a formula called “SMREK.” Someday . . . )

Again, we’re trying to divine the players who succeeded at the highest levels and separate them from the ones who were merely very good players for a long time. Because of that, the highest-value achievements are orders of magnitude more important than more common accomplishments (like making the All-Star team or Third Team All-NBA) that in any other company might be very impressive.

GOAT points is a cumulative points system that adds up all the “quality” from a player’s career. In that way, it rewards longevity, but not at the expense of excellence. Bill Walton’s 1976–77 and 1977–78 seasons are worth more than a lot of players’ entire careers.

Here’s the system:

Advertisement

MVP vote shares: 50 points for each 1.0

Basketball-reference.com has a system for determining a player’s share of the MVP vote, which is a more precise metric than a binary first-second-third and even allows us to distinguish among near-unanimous awards from more contested votes.

For example, Bill Walton had 0.117 MVP vote shares in 1977 (when he finished second) and 0.403 MVP vote shares in 1978 (when he won). He goes in the books with 0.52 career vote shares. The all-time leader here through 2022–23 is LeBron James, with 8.8.

One note here: There are eight players (Julius Erving, Rick Barry, Billy Cunningham, Spencer Haywood, Artis Gilmore, Connie Hawkins, George McGinnis, and Mel Daniels) who factor at least somewhat into the top-100 discussion and received significant ABA MVP vote shares; I took these at one-third of their value. This feels like a fair adjustment: first, because the ABA had half as many teams as the NBA for nearly the entirety of its existence and, second, while it was close to the NBA in quality, I don’t think anyone thought it achieved full parity.

Additionally, I had to go back in time and give an estimated 3.5 MVP vote shares to George Mikan; the league didn’t give out the award until 1955–56, when Mikan’s prime years had passed. If you’re scoring at home, I also gave 1.0 to Joe Fulks and 0.5 to Paul Arizin.

  • First Team All-NBA: 10 points each
  • Second Team All-NBA: 3 points each
  • Third Team All-NBA: 1 point each
  • First Team All-ABA: 5 points each

Roughly tripling the value between First and Second Team, and again between second and third, keeps the emphasis on the highest-order achievements. Note that even First Team All-NBA is just one-fifth as valuable as a full MVP vote share. Consistent with the treatment above, I also halved the reward for achieving ABA First Team and didn’t acknowledge the second team.

Finals MVP: 10 points

Note that for those who played before the advent of the award in 1969, I had to “award” a Finals MVP based on who likely would have won it that year. I handed out seven to Bill Russell, four to George Mikan, one more to Wilt Chamberlain, and one each to Bob Pettit, Bob Cousy, Paul Arizin, Bob Davies, Sam Jones, and Dolph Schayes. Hopefully you agree with my voting.

Advertisement

All-Star team: 1 point

In the context of comparing all-time greats, making the All-Star team is just not that big a deal; it’s the floor, not the ceiling.

Every player in the GOAT points top 100 was named to at least five All-Star teams except the players from before the ’50s, who didn’t have an All-Star Game to play in. (I “selected” those players for the years they were first-team all-league and didn’t have a game to play in.)

I did not acknowledge making an ABA All-Star team; in conferences with five and six teams, respectively, the bar was just too low.

Career win shares above 100: 1 point

To balance some of the emphasis on peak value versus career value, and to reward more general team accomplishment and durability, I added a bonus for players who achieved at least 100 career win shares on basketball-reference.com. This is a fairly simplistic measurement, yes, but it has the advantage of being available back to the beginning of the NBA.

Conveniently, 96 players in NBA history had at least 100 career win shares through 2022–23, and received extra points this way. Most got scraps, however; only 24 players in league annals have cleared 150 win shares. Setting a bar at 100 strikes a balance between rewarding quality longevity without overly rewarding “hanging around” years or overly punishing players with brief peaks.

Advertisement

Note that I did not count ABA win shares here; there are some totals from the early years of that league especially that are just batty; suffice to say it produced results that I do not think I could defend.

Career BPM above 2.0: 7.5 points per point

Finally, we have a contribution from the advanced stats, somewhat. Basketball-reference.com only has BPM dating to 1974, and uses some tricks to fill in gaps for everything prior to 1985, so it’s definitely more valuable for modern players than for old-timers. I included it here to help weigh the modern players in particular; I think it’s hard for us to answer the question “How great is Paul George?” while his career is going on, and this helps provide a historical guidepost.

The limitation here is that I had to make crude estimates for pre-1974 players, generally giving them the benefit of the doubt and rating them comparable to historical peers from later eras. Because of this, I had to make BPM’s contribution relatively minor; doubling my estimate for Elgin Baylor, for instance, would only move him up three spots in the GOAT point standings.

So what do GOAT points give us? Still a lot of questions about comparing eras and roles, of course. What do we do with Mikan, for example? GOAT points tells us something we already know — he dominated the early 1950s — but tells us nothing about the relative strength of the league then versus in 1972, let alone 1992 or 2022.

For that matter, GOAT points doesn’t really know what to do with Dennis Rodman, either, or how to handle cases of extreme longevity (Karl Malone, John Stockton), or what to do about Michael Jordan skipping two years of his prime and then retiring at 35.* It can’t tell you whether Walt Frazier was better than Isiah Thomas, or if Clyde Drexler was better than Dwyane Wade, or if 1.75 God-level seasons from Bill Walton is better than 15 years of Robert Parish being the third-best center in the East.
* (Those Wizards years didn’t happen.)

Advertisement

What it can do, at least, is set the stage for the discussion. Maybe I weighted some stuff too highly and other things not highly enough; surely there are ways this can be improved in the coming years, especially if we get better historical advanced stats.

That said, it also brings some important debate questions to light, particularly regarding a few players who were excluded from this list or, perhaps, vaulted too prominently in it.

OK, enough of my yapping. It’s time for the envelopes. Here’s what the GOAT points formula spits out for the top 100 players in pro basketball history:

GOAT Points: “The Basketball 100”

RANK PLAYER GOAT POINTS

1

Advertisement

LeBron James

857.3

2

Michael Jordan

750.2

Advertisement

3

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

660.1

4

Tim Duncan

Advertisement

504.2

5

Karl Malone

503.6

6

Advertisement

Wilt Chamberlain

499.0

7

Larry Bird

487.7

Advertisement

8

Magic Johnson

486.6

9

Bill Russell

Advertisement

471.5

10

Shaquille O’Neal

459.6

11

Advertisement

Kobe Bryant

457.1

12

Kevin Durant

373.7

Advertisement

13

James Harden

356.2

14

Oscar Robertson

Advertisement

344.5

15

David Robinson

335.1

16

Advertisement

Kevin Garnett

324.1

17

George Mikan

320.0

Advertisement

18

Bob Pettit

317.5

19

Hakeem Olajuwon

Advertisement

316.0

20

Jerry West

315.5

21

Advertisement

Nikola Jokić

307.9

22

Giannis Antetokounmpo

307.1

Advertisement

23

Chris Paul

305.2

24

Charles Barkley

Advertisement

305.0

25

Dirk Nowitzki

297.1

26

Advertisement

Moses Malone

286.0

27

Steph Curry

268.0

Advertisement

28

Julius Erving

230.5

29

Steve Nash

Advertisement

218.7

30

John Stockton

204.2

31

Advertisement

Elgin Baylor

202.5

32

Bob Cousy

196.5

Advertisement

33

Dolph Schayes

184.5

34

Joel Embiid

Advertisement

181.5

35

Dwight Howard

161.0

36

Advertisement

Kawhi Leonard

160.3

37

Jason Kidd

159.6

Advertisement

38

Rick Barry

152.8

39

Russell Westbrook

Advertisement

150.9

40

Patrick Ewing

141.8

41

Advertisement

Gary Payton

140.5

42

Allen Iverson

140.0

Advertisement

43

John Havlicek

138.5

44

Dwyane Wade

Advertisement

138.4

45

Luka Dončić

133.5

46

Advertisement

Clyde Drexler

129.7

47

Anthony Davis

129.1

Advertisement

48

George Gervin

123.8

49

Scottie Pippen

Advertisement

120.7

50

Tracy McGrady

107.0

51

Advertisement

Willis Reed

106.5

52

Elvin Hayes

102.0

Advertisement

53

Dominique Wilkins

99.4

54

Joe Fulks

Advertisement

98.0

55

Bob McAdoo

94.2

56

Advertisement

Paul Pierce

93.6

57

Reggie Miller

93.3

Advertisement

58

Dave Cowens

89.0

59

Paul Arizin

Advertisement

87.0

60

Walt Frazier

83.5

61

Advertisement

Damian Lillard

83.1

62

Hal Greer

82.0

Advertisement

63

Wes Unseld

76.8

64

Robert Parish

Advertisement

75.0

65

Isiah Thomas

74.8

66

Advertisement

Sidney Moncrief

74.5

67

Billy Cunningham

73.0

Advertisement

68

Alonzo Mourning

71.5

69

Connie Hawkins

Advertisement

71.1

70

Ray Allen

70.9

71

Advertisement

Chauncey Billups

70.0

72

Pau Gasol

70.0

Advertisement

73

Bill Sharman

69.5

74

Bob Lanier

Advertisement

68.6

75

Bill Walton

67.3

76

Advertisement

Tiny Archibald

67.0

77

Mel Daniels

66.6

Advertisement

78

Chris Webber

65.7

79

Artis Gilmore

Advertisement

65.4

80

Adrian Dantley

64.3

81

Advertisement

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander

64.3

82

Jayson Tatum

63.0

Advertisement

83

Spencer Haywood

62.0

84

Grant Hill

Advertisement

61.5

85

Derrick Rose

59.5

86

Advertisement

Paul George

59.3

87

Bernard King

58.0

Advertisement

88

Tony Parker

57.0

89

Bob Davies

Advertisement

57.0

90

Jimmy Butler

50.5

91

Advertisement

Carmelo Anthony

50.0

92

Dave Bing

50.0

Advertisement

93

Vince Carter

49.5

94

Neil Johnston

Advertisement

49.0

95

Kevin McHale

48.8

96

Advertisement

Tim Hardaway Sr.

48.3

97

Jerry Lucas

48.0

Advertisement

98

Blake Griffin

48.0

99

Paul Westphal

Advertisement

44.0

100

Penny Hardaway

43.8


Excerpted from “The Basketball 100” published by William Morrow. Copyright © 2024 by The Athletic Media Company. Reprinted courtesy of HarperCollins Publishers

Advertisement

(Illustration: Kelsea Petersen / The Athletic; Photo: Jesse D. Garrabrant / NBAE via Getty Images)

Sports

2025-26 NBA Finals MVP Odds: KAT Chasing Brunson Atop Board

Published

on

2025-26 NBA Finals MVP Odds: KAT Chasing Brunson Atop Board

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

This year’s NBA Finals is a rematch of the last time the Knicks made it to the championship series, way back at the conclusion of the 1998-99 season. 

In that Finals, the Spurs defeated the Knicks in five games. Now, New York gets a shot to get its lick back, nearly 30 years later. 

Regardless, whichever team wins this series will need huge performances from its star players. 

Let’s check out the odds for NBA Finals MVP as of June 8 at FanDuel Sportsbook. 

Advertisement

This page may contain affiliate links to legal sports betting partners. If you sign up or place a wager, FOX Sports may be compensated. Read more about Sports Betting on FOX Sports.

2025-26 NBA Finals MVP

Jalen Brunson: +115 (bet $10 to win $21.50 total)
Karl-Anthony Towns: +165 (bet $10 to win $26.50 total)
Victor Wembanyama: +380 (bet $10 to win $48 total)

Before the Finals began, anyone not named Wembanyama or Brunson didn’t appear to have much of a chance at this award, at least according to the early odds. 

However, now that New York is up 2-0, its second star, Karl-Anthony Towns, has crashed the party.

Advertisement

Towns has moved to second on the board after playing Wemby to a standstill through two games. In Game 2, KAT had 21 points (8-for-12 shooting), 13 rebounds and four assists. The Knicks won by one. 

Brunson put up 20 points in Game 2, but was 7-for-25 from the field. He also had four turnovers.

Wembanyama finished Game 1 with 26 points, 12 rebounds and three blocks. In Game 2, he had 29 points, nine rebounds and four blocks. 

Continue Reading

Sports

Commentary: She broke baseball’s glass ceiling. Now Kim Ng is taking softball to the next level

Published

on

Commentary: She broke baseball’s glass ceiling. Now Kim Ng is taking softball to the next level

There’s no crying in baseball, but Kim Ng works in softball now. And as commissioner of the Athletes Unlimited Softball League, the former Dodgers assistant general manager has been fielding lots of tearful feedback from fans overcome by the fact that softball players finally, finally have a big league of their own.

“I can’t even tell you the number of people that have approached me, just openly sobbing with happiness,” she said. “It’s been incredible, experiencing all of that and understanding how long people have been waiting for something like this.”

It really is like that. Ask Lisa Fernandez, softball pioneer and total boss: “I’ll be watching and get emotional, just looking at how far this game has come.”

With MLB backing the Athletes Unlimited Softball League, or AUSL, for a second season and Ng back to steer it, sustainable professional softball is starting to feel real.

Former UCLA pitcher Rachel Garcia plays for Athletes Unlimited Team McQuillin.

Advertisement

(Grant Halverson / Getty Images)

Fernandez remembers when it was a huge deal to get one softball game on TV, and now ESPN will broadcast 50 AUSL games and ABC will carry the championship. And after last year’s four-team 10-city barnstorming tour, the league will add two teams and anchor itself to locations in North Carolina, Illinois, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas and Utah.

The ball gets rolling on Tuesday, just days after the conclusion of the Women’s College World Series — which last season averaged a record 1.3 million viewers on ESPN, including pulling 3.9 million for UCLA’s thriller against Tennessee.

Big steps, baby steps. All going the right direction.

Advertisement

“I would hope that we are the major league baseball of softball,” Ng, 57, said in a phone conversation. “That is a good number of teams, spread out across the country, with a huge following, all of our games televised.

“That’s the goal. To be the MLB of softball.”

Ng spent more than 30 years in the MLB, including a decade-long stint with the Dodgers. She was also the first woman to serve as a big-league general manager, leading the Miami Marlins from 2020 through the 2023 season. She declined her option after the team made its first full-season playoff appearance in two decades and then announced plans to introduce a president of baseball operations position that would’ve siphoned away some of her say-so.

Miami Marlins general manger Kim Ng sits in a golf cart and talks with manager Marlins Skip Schumaker.

Miami Marlins general manger Kim Ng, left, sits in a golf cart and talks with manager Marlins Skip Schumaker during a 2023 spring training workout.

(Lynne Sladky / Associated Press)

Advertisement

“Breaking that glass ceiling, that’s special to me,” Ng said. “But I think in a different way, this [work with the AUSL] is for sure one of the more meaningful things I’ve done.”

She said a former MLB colleague recently asked her about the AUSL: “I said, ‘I’m working for the women now.’”

The former co-worker corrected her: “You were always working for the women.’”

Before that, as a kid, she was a softball infielder in Long Island and then at the University of Chicago. “I was scrappy,” Ng said, “which is definitely how I describe my personality and the way I approach most things in life.”

It’s served her well. And now it’s serving softball, a sport that for decades has been among the most popular for girls in America, even without long-term playing prospects or pro players to strive to emulate.

Advertisement

Compare it with basketball: About three-quarters of the WNBA’s current players have never even lived in a world without an established professional women’s basketball league in America.

UCLA senior Megan Grant hits an RBI sacrifice fly to tie the Bruins' NCAA super regional game against UCF on May 23.

UCLA star hitter Megan Grant will play in the Athletes Unlimited softball league after wrapping up her record-setting college career.

(Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times)

The NBA-backed WNBA is celebrating its 30th season this summer with a lucrative new CBA and 15 teams, two of them expansion franchises, including one in Canada, and the Bay Area-based Golden State Valkyries valued at $850 million.

The AUSL is about to embark on Year 2.

Advertisement

There have been attempts to start up professional softball leagues before. Those weren’t just long shots, more like Megan Grant moonshots.

But now we have Bryanna Lopez, a 12-year-old catcher from Alhambra, sitting in the Easton Stadium stands at UCLA, watching her heroes play and telling me, without hesitation: “I want to play professional softball. It’s a really big dream.”

And a really big deal.

For players and a growing audience of folks like Kaitlyn Laabs, the superfan in a chef’s hat at UCLA games, who want to watch the home run queen Grant continue to mash. To see her teammates Jordan Woolery keep flaunting her flashy slash line and Taylor Tinsley sharpening her wicked arsenal of pitches.

UCLA starting pitcher Taylor Tinsley celebrates with first baseman Jordan Woolery during an NCAA super regional game.

UCLA starting pitcher Taylor Tinsley and first baseman Jordan Woolery are poised to start their professional softball careers this week.

(Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

“A lot of times, seniors come in their last year thinking it’s the end of their career, and that puts a lot more pressure,” UCLA’s Woolery said earlier this month, before the Bruins advanced to the Women’s College World Series for the third straight season. “So, for me, Megan, Tins, [the AUSL] opens us up a little bit to play free, knowing it’s not the end of the road.”

Ng’s presence, first as an adviser and starting last season as commissioner, is helping legitimize the new league.

“She’s the right person at the right time,” said Fernandez, the UCLA associate head coach, who is also the general manager of the defending champion Utah Talons. “Knowing Kim’s background in baseball, having her know the business of how to run a league, a no-brainer for me.”

Ng’s team-building acumen is helping her coach up first-time general managers. Her experience at MLB’s league office, working to grow the game internationally, ensures she’ll be patient, methodical — which is to say, the AUSL is not rushing to join the Sparks and the National Women’s Soccer League’s Angel City FC in the complicated, competitive L.A. market until it’s good and ready.

Advertisement

“Softball just has had its ups and downs in terms of creating a solid foundation,” Ng said. “Why has it taken so long? It’s hard to say, but obviously the revenue is a huge piece of it. Now, with MLB as a major investor, they’re understanding of the idea that we’re complementary.”

MLB has invested a reported $10 million in the AUSL — in addition to offering its massive promotional platform. So after Grant hit an NCAA record-extending 39th home run, the No. 4 overall pick was interviewed by Harold Reynolds on “MLB Tonight.”

Beside Grant, who is bound for the Portland Cascade, there will be 12 other former Bruins sprinkled among the league’s six rosters. Woolery and Tinsley will team up with a few other former Bruins on the Talons.

“You’d lose a generation of players if the growth is capped,” said Laabs, the softball fan. “But right now, softball is on a rocket ship. Let’s keep on cooking, let’s keep on flying, let’s show that if you build it, they will come.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Sports

Ketel Marte frustrating Diamondbacks by opting to take days off with trade deadline looming: report

Published

on

Ketel Marte frustrating Diamondbacks by opting to take days off with trade deadline looming: report

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Arizona Diamondbacks All-Star second baseman Ketel Marte has reportedly been frustrating people within the organization with the MLB trade deadline looming.

Marte, a switch-hitter with power from both sides of the plate, is someone Arizona has tried to trade this past winter despite his talent and six-year extension that kicked in this season.

But USA TODAY reported Marte “continues to frustrate segments of the organization by opting to take days off.” Most recently, Marte decided to sit for last week’s game against the Los Angeles Dodgers, where superstar Shohei Ohtani was pitching, and he then proceeded to hit a walk-off home run the next day for the D-Backs.

Advertisement

Ketel Marte of the Arizona Diamondbacks looks on before the game against the Seattle Mariners at T-Mobile Park in Seattle, Washington, on May 30, 2026. (Maddy Grassy/Getty Images)

The reason for Marte missing the game last Wednesday was a mixture of his decision as well as the second baseman dealing with lower-back and hamstring ailments, per Arizona Sports. Marte didn’t want to risk any further injury.

“We’re all human, and we all need a day here and there,” Marte said through a translator following the walk-off homer he hit on Thursday’s game.

KETEL MARTE RECEIVES STANDING OVATION FROM DIAMONDBACKS FANS IN FIRST HOME GAME SINCE CONTROVERSIAL HECKLING

This also isn’t new for Marte, who created some tension in the clubhouse due to absences and off-day requests near the All-Star break. It was reported that Marte’s teammates didn’t appreciate trying to time his off-days, leading to an apology later on.

Advertisement

Ketel Marte of the Arizona Diamondbacks bats during the first inning against the Seattle Mariners at T-Mobile Park in Seattle, Washington, on May 30, 2026. (Maddy Grassy/Getty Images)

With Marte being involved in trade rumors in the past, they will certainly pick up with MLB’s trade deadline scheduled for Aug. 3 this year. It’s later than usual, but with teams dealing with injuries as well as trying to bolster their lineups, rotations and bullpens, players with Marte’s talent will surely lead to calls to those in the Arizona front office.

Marte should be sold at a high price, if at all, given he is under contract through the 2030 campaign at a relatively low price after signing his six-year, $116.5 million contract. He also has a player option for the 2031 season, where he will be age 37.

While second base is his usual spot on the field, Marte has played shortstop as well as center field in his 12-year career. The Dominican Republic product has earned three All-Star nods, including each of the past two seasons.

Ketel Marte of the Arizona Diamondbacks celebrates after hitting a two-run home run against the Colorado Rockies during the fourth inning at Chase Field in Phoenix, Ariz., on May 23, 2026. (Norm Hall/Getty Images)

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

This year, Marte is slashing .250/.304/.450 with a .754 OPS — the lowest mark since his 2022 campaign in Arizona (.727). He has hit 11 homers, driven in 37 runs and scored 37 times across 60 games.     

Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending