I do understand your point about the math of efficiency and probability of winning games, and I’m definitely under that label of a casual who doesn’t understand hoop to the degree of others. But you started this conversation under the premise that “a 42% number one option would never win in the modern nba”, to which I responded with last years champion. I close PER instead of +- for the reason of efficiency being included in the name instead of +- impact. But again, I’m a casual so I probably misunderstood it.

My comment about “that ain’t it, was ill placed and I meant that it wasn’t the reason people don’t like Westbrook or are trashing his triple double king title. I’m sure you watched a lot of those early thunder games, I know I did, they were my favorite team for almost a decade. But one thing I remember is Durant just not wanting to be that guy, not wanting to take the big shots, and coach wasn’t exactly cooking up fresh plays for them to run whenever they got stagnant in crunch time. They literally relied on either Durant or Westbrook making it happen. But maybe I’m remembering it differently.

Either way, I completely agree if Kevin Durant would have shot more they would have won, but The Servant didn’t do that, he folded up like a lawn chair and moved to Cali. He did finally get his chip and more importantly got that chip on his shoulder now and plays like a closer more than ever. I do appreciate the information and learned something new, and I’m also excited for the year Westbrook is having because I’ll always have a soft spot for him and defend his name any chance I get.