1.
The lineups data is meaningless. Sample size and of course the ridiculous amount of turnover and turmoil this team had last year. This season will be a far better indicator of how these lineups operate together with a full off-season/training camp under what Doug is coaching. Not the hodge-podge we tried to create mid-season last season after firing our HC and trading our franchise player. I've stayed pretty consistent on this point all summer too, I'm willing to just throw out last season and let these guys start fresh from game 1 and judge from there. Even if we wanted to "trust" the lineup data, it's such a small sample that there's nothing to gleam from it anyway.
2. Why are you not using LaVine's stats with the Bulls? (Which, huh, he played better than, interesting how you might leave that off). That alone changes a lot of your "points". If you're only going to compare LaVine's Kings tenure, then you should mod your data to reflect that with DDR's as well. If you're comparing DDR's whole season, compare LaVine's whole season. If you're going to go through the effort of trying to make a "statistical argument", you should probably try and not and bring a completely skewed sample to the table.
I don't see how anything that LaVine did on the Bulls in a different lineup with a different coach is at all relevant to our situation right now. If we're talking overall about who has had the better career than yeah we can fold those numbers into the conversation but if the topic at hand is "who should be in the starting lineup this season" -- which I thought was what we were talking about -- than I'm only going to look at the data sample we have which involves both of these players on this roster with most of these teammates playing for this coach.
I expected you to say LaVine's numbers are skewed because he came in mid-season and didn't have time to fully acclimate. I don't fully buy that for a veteran player who has been 10 years in the league, but sure that's your prerogative. Maybe he needs 8 months to get his sea legs under him. You asked me for a shred of evidence and I gave you some numbers. I don't even really like quantitative data at this point for player comparisons. If anything there's so much of it now that you can use it to make just about any argument. But for those who do like numbers, they pretty much all tell the same story. Well, except for 3pt%. I guess we'll see if the guy who was otherworldly good at making contested jumpers last season remains so or if that was just an unsustainable fluke.