http://nba.fanhouse.com/2008/07/28/ricky-davis-is-a-clipper/ He signed for only 4.7 million for 2 years. We could've gotten him instead of barry. He's a better offensive player, with defensive oriented battier possibly coming off the bench and Landry's uncertainty, i still don't know why we were so high on a very old Barry when we could've got Davis and still got Artest.
He is talented but would screw up team chemistry here. IMO, Davis can be a head case and you want to keep guys like him away from Artest. If Artest wasn't on board, Davis would have been very very attractive, especially at that price. Clippers got a great deal.
...The Rockets quota for crazy mad SFs has been filled. Besides which, where in the hell would the Rockets find minutes for Ricky even if he signed?
Who says he's a better offensive player for the backup SG role? We needed a dead-eye three point shooter that could handle. Barry fits that role far better than Ricky Davis.
Davis shot .403 at 3 point, for 135-333 last season, not to mention he played 81 games. Davis doesn't have handles? Come on now, he may not be able to play PG, but he's good enough to handle the ball as a SG. The main thing is, we could have gotten him for very cheap, but we got a very old Barry who is now prone to injuries.
To be honest, I didn't realize Ricky Davis has shot 40% from 3 the last two seasons. Barry has been even better, and (statistically) he's been the most efficient offensive player in the league over the last two years. I'll grant you that Davis figures to be a more durable player this season. That counts for something. Skill-wise, I like what Barry brings more.
ricky davis is better than barry no doubt at this point of their careers....but oh well, we can't get every steal, right? Who knew davis would be available at this price? he was waiting it out, trying to find the best contract he could get. If we waited this long, barry would have been gone.
