re: re: Re: Ricky Davis: Should He Be Exposed In The Expansion Draft?

[wayray@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

> ** Original Subject: re: Re: Ricky Davis: Should He Be Exposed In The Expansion Draft?
> ** Original Sender: Kestutis.Kveraga@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Kestutis Kveraga)
> ** Original Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 08:15:05 -0800 (PST)

> --- You wrote:
> Many of the players I cited, I would classify as better now or for
> the future. I think there's a real chance for a team to steal
> Richardson away from the Clippers after the season, and he's certainly
> an upgrade over Davis.
> --- end of quote ---
> 
> Why do you think so? Q is certainly talented, but he's basically a Ricky
> Davis-Light. He also has a reputation as an immature head case (perhaps to a
> lesser extent than Davis, but still) and a talented scorer. He has never shot
> above .381 in his career, and he's not the passer that Ricky is.   Ricky has
> never shot LESS than .41, so their FG% distributions don't even overlap. 
> Ricky was averaging 20, 5 and 5 last season. Sure, it's on a bad team, but what
> kind of team has Q been on?
> 
> Swift, while a promising young PF, is not nearly the player that Davis is. He
> may evolve into one, and being a big guy that makes him inherently more
> valuable, but whether that happens is unknown. As long as Davis stays with the
> program, he should be kept (barring an unbelievable trade offer, of course). 
> Kestas 


Yes, Richardson's shooting percentage needs work, though he's at .375
for three-pointers, which is pretty good.  I would say Richardson's better
defense, less flakiness, better rebounding, general maturability this
season, and less of a need to dominate the offense makes him  a better 
player, and a better fit with shot-hungry Pierce. 
Ray