Apollo wrote:
He's a great floor general. He makes everyone better with his high ball IQ and good shooting. Your whole argument is that he's not a good leader because of his win %. That's weak ground. It would be different if you said I think he's a poor leader for this, that and the other thing and also see here, the win percentage further validates my argument but you're not doing that. What you're doing is suggesting he's a poor leader because his team doesn't win many games. Do you see the flaw in this line of thinking?