If you want to interrogate me as if I'm a detainee at Guantanamo Bay, then fine, but I refuse to say what you want to hear, no matter how many times you waterboard me. My old comment was said without introspection, while my new comments have the benefit of my deeper knowledge of the game and increased scrutiny.
All I'm saying is that those two games are incomparable, because while superficially the same, they're quite different because of differing game shape and players. The loss of my big game shape advantage is a large reason why his team's performance greatly improved, and counter-intuitively the SF change in the second game benefited his team. His starting SF had a negative +/- before he was injured, and his cache of SF after that defended my SF very well, likely due to my SF playing the entire game while fresh legs constantly guarded him.
Again, I disagree with the idea that a starter should automatically perform better than his backup against any team, as the backup could match up better against the opponent, or, despite a lower salary, perform better because of higher game shape, and also because of the aforementioned fresh legs vs. tired ones.
Basically, you ignored the complexity of the comparison, which is completely understandable, as is your stubbornness to admit your assessment was careless, and because of my benevolence and love of humankind I forgive your barbarous attacks on me, and the future bite marks I'll suffer from making this post.
in the first game, my C position posted 115 pp100, and Vega went 3-13 in 38 minutes there. Mocarski (who split his time between backup PF and backup C went 6-14). That's where the randomness happened.
Agaliatolis got minutes at center and scored 28 points on 19 shots in the game, so I'm sure he raised the PP100.
EDIT: you didn't *exactly* say this, sorry, I'm still hyper-adrenalinic from the Italy-Germany soccer game: but the substance of the post remains the same
You are forgiven.