…but he isn’t much worse either. I say this because of this brief feature ESPN just broadcast on the top college point guards in the country. The anchor narrated highlight reels of Ty Lawson, Darren Collison, Jonathan Wallace, D.J. Augustin, and Derrick Rose. Each of those seemed acceptable as a top point guard. But then they showed each player’s points and assists per game. To my surprise, Wallace is averaging 10.3 PPG, 2.3 APG, and 2.0 RPG. My first thought was “those are not elite numbers.” My second thought was “actually, those look a lot like Alex Gordon’s numbers.”
Staying with the recent Vanderbilt-centric bent of this blog, Alex Gordon is our starting shooting guard. Compare his numbers to Wallace’s:
- Gordon: 10.2 PPG, 3.4 APG, 2.8 RPG, 2.5 TO, 1.3 SPG, 41.9% FG, 41.6% 3P
- Wallace: 10.3 PPG, 2.3 APG, 2.0 RPG, 1.5 TO, 0.9 SPG, 50.5% FG, 44.9% 3P
Now, I think Wallace is better than Gordon. He’s clearly a more efficient player. I don’t know a ton about basketball, but Gordon’s points, rebounds and assists all probably benefit from slightly more minutes than Wallace in a faster-paced offense. So unless I’m really missing something (which happens a lot), Wallace is better.
I’m not sure, however, that Wallace is clearly one of the top five point guards in the country. Sometimes sports media outlets give the edge to seniors in things like this, but Wallace is the only senior in that group, so it’s not that. And also, where the heck are Jerryd Bayless (18.8/4.4/3.2), Scottie Reynolds (14.8/4.0/2.8), and Tyrese Rice (19.5/5.3/3.8)?
I’m trying to take my understanding of basketball to the next level, so if anyone thinks Wallace deserves to be included on this list, I would love to hear a thoughtful explanation. Until then, I shall remain slightly incredulous and very curious.