Fair warning:
Grady already wrote a post decrying the choice of Lawrence Hill as Pac-10 player of the week, and normally I don't worry too much about such things -- after all, Daven Harmeling has won two of them -- but the more I started to look at the numbers, the more absurd the choice became, especially when you throw Aron Baynes into the mix.
The raw stats clearly favor Rochestie, but let's look at the three in terms of tempo neutral stats from the weekend, bearing in mind that these Rochestie and Baynes averages came over two games, not just one (category leader in bold):
| %Min | O-Rating | eFG% | OR% | DR% | A% | BLK% | |
| Rochestie | 98.8 | 142.6 | 54.4 | 2.0 | 6.5 | 50.8 | 0.0 |
| Baynes | 81.2 | 127.7 | 75.4 | 16.7 | 25.5 | 0.0 | 7.7 |
| Hill | 95.0 | 152.7 | 80.0 | 3.5 | 7.0 | 17.1 | 0.0 |
So, in seven categories, Hill led just two -- the ones tied to scoring. But when we look at the whole package, Rochestie's offensive rating is just slightly off HIll's, while his rebounding rates are very nearly equal to Hill's (despite being seven inches shorter and a guard) and his assist rate is an amazing 50.8.
Meanwhile, you've got Baynes, who has a stronger argument than most people realize. Those rebounding rates are insanely awesome -- the kinds normally associated with guys like Jordan Hill and Jon Brockman. If Baynes played on a faster paced team, his average would have been over 15. And don't forget that block percentage, which is very good as well.
I'm not saying Hill didn't have a nice game. But that's all it was -- one game -- and it wasn't as well-rounded as both of the Cougs who were nominated.