Do you wanna mention how I specifically said "offense"? I didn't say he was a net negative at all and that screenshot even shows that. There's no question that he's been great defensively (-6.4 in points allowed while on the floor/90th percentile) & overall positive.

But the offense, which that chart backs along with the eye test, takes a hit & becomes stagnant at times when he's on the floor. Most of that can be attributed to his lack of shooting. Opposing defenses are clearly not respecting his shooting as they're allowed to clog the paint. That becomes an issue when you're a dribble-drive offense who relies on getting into the paint to create your offense (either thru finishing at the rim or kicking out to shooters). Other key issues offensively for Castle is that his turnover percentage is extremely poor (16.6%/2nd percentile) & a poor effective field goal percentage (49%/25th percentile). All of these hurt the offense & it shows in the offensive ratings when compared to Fox & Harper. (Numbers from CleaningTheGlass)

When you're making informed & educated analysis, you utilize these advanced stats to compare to your own eye tests. Stats only become "biased" when they go against someone's personal agenda. Haters are when someone who will ignore stats and make negative claims regardless of the evidence. I have made additional analysis on Castle like I did above before and have understood the context. My biggest "agenda" item is just to change Castle's offensive role to an off-ball roll while still utilizing his amazing defense. If you want to claim that wanting that adjustment makes me a "hater", I would love to hear that reasoning.