05-12-2023, 02:37 PM
(05-12-2023, 06:37 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: Agree with the last sentence. Agree that you are triggered. Agree that Powell would be a reasonable backup center. But, this conversation isn't about Powell. It is about Wood.
There is a difference between dismissed and refuted. You are trying to attribute team success to Wood's starting. Anytime someone offers something that might explain your number differently, you simply repeat some version of your number.
The competition was crap. Response: 9-4
The good teams we played were missing players. Response: Winning %
The only reason Powell was even brought up was that his minutes in the nine wins were actually more valuable to the wins than Wood's minutes. If your daughter had a goal of selling $10 worth of Girl Scout cookies and I bought $6 worth and Wood bought $4 worth, who helped her accomplish her goal more. The answer is Dan the Cookie Man, even if Wood bought the last $4 worth that got her to her goal. No one here claimed Powell is the answer or even a good starting center. The fact that you turn so quickly to an anti-Powell argument instead of a new pro-Wood argument (other than some version of 9-4) is pretty telling. The reason is 9-4 doesn't come close to proving causation.
When the season was on the line, a starting lineup of Luka and Kyrie lost twice to Charlotte. Ya, Luka and Kyrie are spares.
IMO, the issue wasn't starting or benching Wood. It was giving him 30-35mins a game. Agreed that with Luka and Wood on the floor at the same time, you have to have 3 good defenders. Are you telling me that Kidd can't scheme to give Wood the 12 mins Luka wasn't on the floor, big minutes when Luka didn't play, and scheme together 20 mins of Luka and Wood playing together? Again, that's what a coach does. IMO this is 100% on Kidd.