JujitsuFlip wrote:And Mitchell had more assists and mor rebounds slightly, similar to Brunson with slightly more points.cgf wrote:JujitsuFlip wrote:No one would see those and say any player killed the other lmaooooo the stats are essentially identical.
You're really hung up on people saying Brunson "killed" Mitchell last spring, huh? Can you at least admit that...even if we focus just on the series between them that was better for Mitchell, despite you being the one to bring up their previous meeting...the #s are neither a push nor do they favor Mitchell?
They were close...other than net rating...but Brunson scored a little more, more efficiently, while taking care of the ball a little better. So claiming that Mitchell was better is even less accurate than anything you're pushing back against.
Both guys played like trash, is the point to take away. Not the point of well this guy was a tiny bit less trash.
When good defensive teams face off, it is bound to happen but actual great players rise above even that.
So you can't just say that despite Brunson grabbing 1 less rebound in the series, he outplayed Mitchell by scoring better and taking better care of the ball? You're really going to die on this "Mitchell was as good or better than Brunson" hill?
At least you can admit that the way Brunson stepped up in round two was the kind of thing that only great players do
Would you be ok with me using your logic to argue that since both Randle & Mitchell sucked last postseason, Julius is just as good or better than Mitchell in the playoffs? Or would you then argue that there are different levels of sucking and acknowledge that one guy sucking could still be better than another player sucking?