Somehow I believe that the argument against Traylor's minutes is over when we cite his significant attribute as setting "legal picks." I do appreciate the attempt to bring rationality to irrationality, but it would seem that we're really stretching it.
How many times last season did Traylor get called for illegal screens? It was nearly a once a game ritual in conference play, as I recall.
Just an example, but at 15:55 of the second half, just before the seal by Traylor on Ellis dunk that you show above, watch Traylor's moving screen. He just didn't get called for it.
I would also add that this "thin" think regarding Mickelson is astoundingly misguided. So, because he is supposedly thinner, he can't set screens "as well"? Actually, Mickelson outweighs Traylor by 25 pounds, listed only 2 inches taller (probably 3-4 inches taller of course). Traylor is not a big guy at all. It's a Traylor-myth so to speak.
Since you cited Mickelson, I would refer you back to Mickelson's performance in the WUG. He actually set a screen, and then scored on a pass to the basketball. A feat that Traylor has always struggled with. Mickelson so outperformed Traylor in the WUG, it was a knock-out. No complaints about Mick's screens, and certainly not his energy.
And the second example you cite, by the way, was a set play, where there was a double "wall" screen at the top by Ellis/Traylor. I cited it in a post last night on another thread.
I do appreciate your effort -- but why is it that the anti-real talent folks that support Traylor have had to ignore statistics and even the "eye test" and have to rely upon the setting screens thing that he failed at regularly over the last two seasons.
There is no doubt that Traylor does some good things. But worthiness for playing time should be a weight of the evidence thing -- what is the total product.
The total product is vastly inferior. If the discussion point is screens, it's over.
And by the way, someone said early on something to the effect of -- it's just like Ned Yost batting Escobar leadoff or something silly like that. No, Escobar was productive. He hit the ball. Escobar is an all star level player.
The real parallel is that it would have been like Ned Yost continuing to play Omar Infante over Ben Zobrist. Ben Zobrist came along, and Omar Infante's limited assets were suddenly less significant. Infante was a terrific defensive player -- which is more valuable that Traylor's screens, or whatever. Yet he found the bench. It is the weight of the evidence. It was also kind of like when Ned Yost batted Chris Getz leadoff or second. It made no sense. But when Yost had better players, Getz was gone.
Bragg is perhaps not quite Zobrist, but Traylor is not even near Infante. The difference over the course of a season is probably the same.