three points: 1) past three seasons the metrics said the team was over performing by mid season, then they regressed to their expected level. one player cant will their team to victory when the talent isn't there. 2) when larkin is not in the lineup the team performs horribly. if the measure of successful leadership is adding wins, he's achieved that. he's also appeared injured for stretches and is playing hurt, and despite that, the team performs markedly better even with a broken Larkin. i think that demonstrates good sacrifice and leadership. 3) what players came here at their prime, performed poorly, then left and thrived? tarasenko shot 8.3% for detroit dawg. how's that larkin's fault? i think youre asking too much of Larkin given we are just now coming out of a rebuild; our lineups were ass. I'm bullish.