Let's go back to the odds. They're released by analysts. Crawford has 1.13 and Porter 5.20.
Tell me who Kavaliauskas beat in the past that can even match Porter's resume?
The Porter vs Brook fight was close - scores are: 114-114, 112-116, 111-117. And this was 2014.
I will give him props for taking the 0 of Victor Postol.
Julius Indongo? anyone familiar with this name?
Jeff Horn? the guy that supposedly beat Manny Pacquiao?
Yuri Gamboa? way past his prime when Crawford fought him.
Jose Benavidez? again, look at the fighters he face defeated before facing Crawford. The level of opposition is weak.
And those fighters are all from the camp of Top Rank, so looks like cherry pick to me, IMHO.
That's a lot of name. I don't want to respond to it one by one. Anyway we could present it this way so that Crawford could appear as if he or his camp is cherry picking. In a similar way that we could also present Porter's resume, which is actually worse than Crawford's in any way you look at it, in this way so that he could look a worse fighter.
At the end of the day, however you discredit Crawford's opponents and praise Porter's opponents, you cannot revise their fight statistics, their pound-for-pound rankings, the records of their performances inside the ring, etc.
All this I think is created to make an impact that the two fighters are at par with each other and are equal in terms of boxing skills. This is to make boxings fans interested. This is just to promote the fight, that this is a showdown of equals. Which is not.
I could have challenged you for a friendly bet here but since the betting sites are offering very high odds for Porter, it is not worth it on your part.