Not that I'm saying there aren't Blazers fans like this, but outside of this forum most of the "Give Lillard ROY already" sort of talk is coming from non blazer related fans and media. I've seen quite a few Blazers fans be cautious toward proclaiming anything.
Quite honestly, that's a bad sign for Davis (if he cares about ROY that is). A lot of people have made up their minds already, and I think the point some in this thread are trying to make is that Davis needs to put in a lot of work to get the attention back on him. He should, he's the number 1 pick and plays great so far. But Lillard has stolen the show as far as outside fans and media goes.
Even if they go by stats, Lillard and Davis play completely different positions and roles, so can't just be looked at head to head stat wise. Voters are going to go by perception, stats and hype combined. For this reason Lillard is the clear front runner right now. Davis has a LOT of time to change things though.
Johnny Firpo wrote:Lillard is amazing, but his percentages are actually plummeting pretty badly at the moment, and as some said, 3/4 of the season is still left, so yeah, i agree with the notion that Davis can still definitely catch up.
He's been less efficient lately, but still has a .548% TS with a eFG% of .499 and his turnovers have improved. Compare his efficiency to some other high usage starting (and star) PGs and he's still pretty efficient overall compared with guys like Westbrook, Holiday, Williams and Rondo in efficiency categories. Not to say he's better than all of those guys, but if we're gonna talk about his efficiency he needs to be compared to other guys in his role, and not judged by his FG% alone vs a bigman.
The two big time point guards that I can think of atm (night shift, zzz) that are clearly more efficient are Tony Parker and Chris Paul, which is pretty normal for them.
So Lillard is doing just fine in overall efficiency, but you've observed his FG% dropping which is correct. He's had some off shooting nights but was still able to be effective.