OKC has not seen any dip without Chet. In fact been slightly better (LARGE sample siz

[ArbitraryWater]

Why?


OKC w/o Chet: 40-8, 83% WR
OKC w/ Chet: 24-6 80% WR

And 1 loss was the OT thriller to Minny after a huge lead.

[warriorfan]

They are a very deep team and he has a good back up

[Neal Romer]

I think it's just becoming more and more clear over time that basketball is not just about the sum of the parts. Having the most talented players in a vacuum does not equate to having the best team.

It's not any kind of knock on Chet. I pointed out recently a stat about Tatum/Brown/KP being Boston's statistically worst lineup. A certain poster acted like I was giving that as an opinion and he went into Boston defense mode, but it's an actual stat. A fact. I suspect the Lakers have a similar stat that they're better when only 2 of their top 3 players on the court together rather than all three.

It's also important to note these kind of stats dont mean a certain lineup CANT become a team's best. But it migh take longer for chemistry to develop with certain combinations than others.

[90sgoat]

I don't really see Chet fitting into that team. Their whole thing is being fast and athletic and Chet is neither. I'm not really high on Chet in general. Just a worse Porzingis and much worse really.

Should trade Chet and some picks for a star this summer.