I don't think it is unfair to compare them at all.
While I agreed with parts of your post earlier, I don't agree much with this final paragraph [copied above].
Napier isn't "without a doubt...I don't think it's even close" better shooter. He's a volume shooter and a volume scorer on a lousy team that needs him to volume shoot and volume score to have any chance of being competitive. Conversely, Ennis sublimates his offensive game to more efficiently run the team. But his play for Team Canada this summer suggests that if he needed to volume score, he is certainly capable of doing so. Frankly, I'm glad that we have a better team than uconn and don't need him to shoot every time he touches the ball because, as uconn has demonstrated, when you live by a gunner, you get burned when said gunner has a poor offensive game.
Secondly Ennis is not only "more of a floor-general," he is the consummate floor general. His innate feel for the game is something that can't be taught. That's the reason that NBA types are so excited about him and why he is moving swiftly up the draft charts, while the lay are scratching their heads and only looking at his statistics and wondering what all of the fuss is about. But to suggest that Napier is a "better" point guard than Ennis is patently false. In fact, I'd say that Ennis as a frosh blows Napier out of the water as a lead guard--this despite him being a frosh to Napier as a senior. Ennis makes everybody on his team better; can't say the same for Napier.
The eyeball test tells the same story. With Ennis quarterbacking our team, we are 23-0 and ranked #1. With Napier at the helm, we wouldn't have this type of balance nor chemistry, would probably have several losses, and wouldn't be nearly as effective closing at the end of games.
