@HighEliteMajor Yeah, tough to compare per minute production when the total minutes is barely 1 half of a basketball game. This has always been my problem comparing stats per minute. I know it's about the fairest way to do it but it still isn't fair. I mean, obviously Greene isn't going to continue to shoot 100% from the field.
And to me there are a lot of less obvious contributors that make per minute comparisons tough when the subjects being compared have vastly different overall minutes. Things like fatigue, slumps, competition played against (not just teams but individual match-ups), role while in the game, pace of game while playing (I know they can take care of this one with per possession stats but again not the full picture), etc. Not to mention aspects that there are not even stats for, like hustle plays, correct positioning, energy exerted, energy given to the team, good passes that lead to missed shots, hockey assists. The list goes on and on.
I know you work with the best information available to you and often do a good job of providing some of that unquantifiable context in your analysis. Don't think I am saying you don't! However, all of this data, even when taken in context, can only give a snapshot of how well a player is playing. And it would be like that picture was taken from very far away with the camera from my old flip phone. You can see it, it just is pretty hard to make out anything with clarity.
Eventually it really comes down to "the eye test" and "feel" which is why there is so much disagreement because it's all so subjective. Trying to make it not, neglects the full story. It's why some coaches can cut it and others can't. It's why statisticians can be valuable assets but do not get paid like the coach.