It seems like many people now agree that Baron Davis was on the business end of one of the biggest ASG snubs in recent history. I, for one, agree. Not only is Baron having the better season, but his team is also having more success as well.
For the one-on-one comparison, I don't think there is any way you could defend taking Roy over Davis. Baron is putting up 22, 5 and 8 a night, adding 2.5 steals every night, shooting 42% from the field and 35% from three. Meanwhile, Roy checks in at 19, 5 and 6, while shooting 46% from the field and 33% from behind the line. In addition, he manages a mere 0.9 spg, while playing 38 mpg, only one minute less than Davis. You could argue Roy gives you a better performance from the field, but his 2-pt shooting percentage is .486, while Davis' shoots at a 47% clip from inside 23-9.
Now, you could certainly argue Davis' lower percentage is a result of playing in a much less structured system. While Roy gets most of his shots in an orderly, "find the best shot available" manner, Davis is pretty much required to take the first available shot, be it an easy one or not. Thus, Baron's ability to hit at nearly the same rate while taking, usually, much more difficult shots, needs to be taken into consideration.
As far as defense goes, Roy's totals over 103 career games in blocked shots are less than what Davis managed as a rookie, considering Roy has started all but two games in his career when Davis' first start came in his second campaign. As far as steals goes, Roy's season high is 3, while Davis has at least matched that number 7 times in his last 10 outings. I know you cannot measure defensive performance based only on statistics, but in this case at least, numbers don't lie.
Now going to the offensive end, who would you rather have if you were in need of a big-time performance? A guy whose career-high in points is lower than Dennis Rodman's, or a guy who has put up 20-plus two out of three times this season? If it comes to playmaking, Roy has never put up more than 11 assists. In the month of January alone, Baron surpassed that total twice. As far as rebounding, both players are pretty much equal, although if you ask me I'll take the strong, athletic guard over the guy who knows where to be most of the time. Knowing where to be might help you get to the ball, but it won't be much help you get it when Trevor Ariza outjumps you and dunks it on your head.
Getting to the point that really riles me up, people say Roy deserved it because his team is having more success. How exactly is that so? Golden State isn't quite lighting everyone up at 29-19, but they've pretty much beaten the teams they were supposed to beat and lost to those who were supposed to beat them. Now, when it comes to Portland, they got hot for a while, and now seem to have come back to Earth. If you take away the Warriors' start without Captain Jack, they win at a 71% rate, while taking their 13-game streak away from Portland leaves them with a poor .424 winning percentage. Even giving Portland a 9-4 record in that streak, they come in at 51%. In short, take away the bizarre or unusual circumstances, and the Warriors are the much better team.
Now, some are saying Roy deserves his All-Star bid because he has led the Blazers to loftier heights than expected. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you are supposed to suck and then, while playing to your fullest potential and catching a few breaks, only manage to be in 9th place out of 15, I don't see where the "over" in overachieving comes in.
All in all, Brandon Roy is having a great season, but he shouldn't be an All-Star. With Roy at full speed ahead, the Blazers might give their first-round opponent a series, IF they make the playoffs. In Davis' case, I don't think there's much doubting the Warriors will get to the postseason, and once there, I wouldn't want to face them. Roy has overachieved, but Davis has performed better than expected too. And when greatness is expected, that is much more than an overachievement.
No comments:
Post a Comment