I'll agree with you on one aspect of what you're saying. It's a team sport. That's why its really hard to reliably judge players based on stats. But since there's only 5 guys on the floor at once, its also pretty damn reasonable to judge a lot based on wins. It's funny that stats guys who feel Rose is so overrated will point to how good a supporting cast he has. Deng, Noah, Boozer, Taj. Yet LeBron's supporting cast of two other top 10 stats players and a handful of very solid role players including Chalmers, Miller, Anthony, Haslem, etc. is just horrible. That's what's laughable. To me, its missing the forest through the trees. the very fact that you call mike miller and joel anthony "very solid role players" lets me know that you're not ready. Really? So you casually ignore everything else I say, ignore the fact he has DWade and Bosh, and attack the contention that Miller and Anthony a solid role players. Therefore, argument is over. You sound like a politician. And for the record, Miller made tons of huge shots last year in the playoffs- more than just about any Bulls seemed to be able to do, and Anthony kept abusing Noah and Boozer like they were little girls. To me, if individual stats cannot accurately predict wins, then they are not reliable. Hollinger and stats people should just go back to the drawing board. Because there is something missing from their formula. But instead of possibly acknowledging that these stats could possibly be wrong, people think of every explanation to explain how the individual stats, which can't possibly be wrong, can explain how the team performs. Hence the ridiculous assertions that the DRose has the best supporting cast in basketball, and LeBron's supporting cast is average at best.