Ricky Snubbed by ESPN "Experts" ESPN Midseason Picks <u>Sixth Man Award</u> The Cast of Picks: Antonio Daniels- 12 ppg-2 rpg-5 apg Radmanovic- 13 ppg-5 rpg-1 apg Earl Boykins- 12 ppg-2 rpg-3 apg Jerry Stackhouse- 15 ppg- 4 rpg-3 apg No Love For: Ricky Davis- 15 ppg-3 rpg-3 apg Is Davis a victim of his bad reputation? <font size="1">even you, Bill Simmons?</font>
In all honestly, I don't understand ESPN at all. Their college polls suck, they're NBA PR typically sucks, all in all, they don't know anything seemingly. If you ask me, RD should at least be considered for the 6th Man. In my opinion, he'd be my pick for 6th Man right now. He's got great stats and he's been consistent for the most part this season.
As we're all aware, ESPN's "Experts" aren't exactly what they used to be. ESPN seems to be more about schtick reporting these days than anything of substance. Nothing against any of the players they talk about, but to flat out not include RD is ridiculous.
It's the fact he is on a bad team, If you look at all the recent past 6th man of the year winners they all came from winning teams. The main guys for the award this year are 3 guys who all play on very good teams. Daniels, Radmanovic and Stackhouse. Last year Antawn Jamison got the award playing for a 50 win team, Bobby Jackson got It the year before on a 50-55 win team, Corliss Williamson got It on a 50 win Piston team. You see a trend? The guys who will be considered the most will be the ones who are on winning teams and Ricky isn't on a team that has a great record. So although I do think Ricky at least deserves to be considered he is never going to be the front runner as long as his team fails to win.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting hagrid:</div><div class="quote_post">ESPN seems to be more about schtick reporting these days than anything of substance.</div> I don't know what your talking about. I find all the yelling over each other to be soothing and it really increases my knowledge of the game...
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AllNet:</div><div class="quote_post">It's the fact he is on a bad team, If you look at all the recent past 6th man of the year winners they all came from winning teams. The main guys for the award this year are 3 guys who all play on very good teams. Daniels, Radmanovic and Stackhouse. Last year Antawn Jamison got the award playing for a 50 win team, Bobby Jackson got It the year before on a 50-55 win team, Corliss Williamson got It on a 50 win Piston team. You see a trend? The guys who will be considered the most will be the ones who are on winning teams and Ricky isn't on a team that has a great record. So although I do think Ricky at least deserves to be considered he is never going to be the front runner as long as his team fails to win.</div> Actually, you're right. I researched this, and there were only 3 occasions in which a player from a team that's won lass than 50 games has won the award. 1990-91 - Detlef Schrempf, Indiana (41-41) 1991-92 - Detlef Schrempf, Indiana (40-42) 1989-90 - Ricky Pierce, Milwaukee (44-38) I personally don't understand that at all. As far as I'm concerned, the award should be given to the best bench player, not the best bench player on a great team. I think people should stop considering team's records for award giving, except for the MVP award. However, the reason I started this thread was because I would hope at least one of those goons would've picked Davis. I mean, Earl Boykins over Ricky Davis? There's no justification there besides Earl's small size. If Boykins was a foot taller, his name wouldn't even be brought into the conversation.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 44Thrilla:</div><div class="quote_post"> However, the reason I started this thread was because I would hope at least one of those goons would've picked Davis. I mean, Earl Boykins over Ricky Davis? There's no justification there besides Earl's small size. If Boykins was a foot taller, his name wouldn't even be brought into the conversation.</div> In Earl's case, yes he is having a good season as a 6th man, but a lot of it has to do with his clutch play in the 4th quarter. Without his energy, scoring and overall play in the 4th Q, the Nuggets would be a far worse team, then what their record shows right now. It just seems like, in the 4th, it's his time and he can score at will. Just look at his game a few days ago when he scored 15? in OT. However, I do agree that Ricky Davis should be getting a lot more consideration than he is getting (almost none) from the media. I'm guessing his reputation has a little to do with it too, althought it definitely should not be a factor. The fact that his team is not that good has to be a reason.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Banks:</div><div class="quote_post">I'm guessing his reputation has a little to do with it too, althought it definitely should not be a factor. The fact that his team is not that good has to be a reason.</div> The only problem with this theory that you have to be a on a good team to get recognition as the 6th man of the year is that Earl Boykin's in on Denver, who has been one of the more disappointing teams and sit 6 games under .500, versus Boston which is 3 games under .500. If it has to do with team record, shouldn't Ricky get more consideration than Earl?
The player who wins the award is usually based on the team's success. However, that has nothing to do with who gets nominated. There's no excuse for Ricky not being there, and I can only guess that they are putting down the players that everyone wants to see.
