Ok so having seen the numbers, what is your conclusion? You've asked for the data, and I've given it to you. I've even given you the data for drives since your point about playstyle is valid.
I wasn't saying that you thought Fox should get superstar calls. It was more about aptitude. If Giannis gets more FTs than Fox, it doesn't have to mean it's only because Giannis gets star calls. It could simply be that Giannis is a much better, physical player and draws more contact. So what's the point in comparing Fox to him specifically?
The issue I take with your question is that as I said, there is no logical "out". If you already presume that Fox is not getting calls, then there is no precise data that would convince you otherwise. If he averages 1 FT less than Giannis, you could still say he's not getting his fair share of calls. If he averages 4 FTs more than Giannis, you could still say he's not getting his fair share of calls, because "a foul is a foul". Then we're just stuck in playing the good ol "eye test" game which is obviously not biased and completely objective.
I wasn't saying that you thought Fox should get superstar calls. It was more about aptitude. If Giannis gets more FTs than Fox, it doesn't have to mean it's only because Giannis gets star calls. It could simply be that Giannis is a much better, physical player and draws more contact. So what's the point in comparing Fox to him specifically?
The issue I take with your question is that as I said, there is no logical "out". If you already presume that Fox is not getting calls, then there is no precise data that would convince you otherwise. If he averages 1 FT less than Giannis, you could still say he's not getting his fair share of calls. If he averages 4 FTs more than Giannis, you could still say he's not getting his fair share of calls, because "a foul is a foul". Then we're just stuck in playing the good ol "eye test" game which is obviously not biased and completely objective.