There's an interesting post over at T.Jose Calderford. The author takes a look at the numbers and asks if Andrea Bargnani should be considered an all-star this year:
Let's get one qualifier out of the way immediately: The only way he has a remote shot is if Dwight Howard wins the fan voting. If Shaq wins the fan vote, that means Howard has to be a reserve, all but guaranteeing Bargnani would be out of the loop.
Next, let's take his one real positive (his scoring) and put it in context:
He's averaging 20.9 points per game, as a 7-footer. Is that rare? Here's the list of 7-footers that have averaged at least that amount over the last 15 years:
So, what he's doing is pretty impressive/unique considering his size and position.
The author then goes into more detail, saying that Bargnani should not be picked ahead of Joakim Noah or Al Horford (which the WP numbers support). He also has a very interesting 'stat of the day':
20+ PTS PER GAME
7-0 OR TALLER
25 YRS OF AGE OR YOUNGER
It's something that's happened just 38 times in NBA history, done by just 14 players. Here is the list (in alpha order):
Joe Barry Carroll
Wins Produced tells us that, over his career, Andrea Bargnani is not productive, and this season is no different. But fans of the NBA have been fooled into thinking that Bargnani is a good player due to the number of points he scores, regardless of his shooting efficiency and other important aspects of basketball (most notably rebounding). Factoids like the ones mentioned on T.Jose Calderford are the type of things that show up during broadcasts and make casual fans think that Bargnani is a good player (even though Joe Barry Carroll is included in this list).
No, Bargnani should not be an all-star. In fact, Bargnani wouldn't even be on my all-star ballot. Yes, he is one of the few young seven-footers to reach an arbitrary number of points scored per game; but if you take a closer look at the numbers you will find that he is not as productive as his PPG suggests.