When playing for perennial losers it's more important to look at efficiency vs statistical totals or averages. That's where advanced stats win out. Anyone expecting Cam Johnson to show up and score almost 20 a game are going to be disappointed but anyone wanting him to hit open 3's and take good shots will get what they're after. With Cam we saw him do that here on a winning team and contribute to that success. His numbers are inflated in Brooklyn because he's a #1 or #2 option most nights.
Point guards need to be examined closer because every team/coach assigns different responsibilities to them. Jamal Murray wouldn't be a good fit here despite being a superior PG to Tyus Jones in almost every measurable way but style is very important when taking in a PG because their assignments differ from team to team.
Better talent in a bubble doesn't always mean that's equally transferable from bubble to bubble.
Absolutely.
Jamal Murray is a great example, he is his team's "point guard" yet he almost never has point guard duties. He is the secondary play maker to the biggest offensive threat in the NBA. He is a good player, don't get me wrong, and big moments don't bother him, but if he is the "best" player on a team, or even option 1b, that team probably isn't making the playoffs. I think there are a number of lesser viewed players who could fill the role he plays for Denver.
I want to compare him to BJ Armstrong, but he's better than that... but not a lot better. I really think if you take Murray out of Denver he's just an above average starting guard.
