So if stats mean nothing, then Jawad Williams is better than, say, Danny Granger?
If not for stats, how would you be able to determine the difference in how good two players are pitted against one another... I'm having a hard time following your post.
Never said stats mean nothing, I said stats are not the sole measure of a player, especially when they play different positions, have different roles, on different teams, or play on poor teams. Stats are a part of the equation, but to use stats and stats only is foolish. Numbers can be misleading, can be manipulated, and can't accurately measure intangible attributes or a player's impact on a game. There are players that can make a huge impact on a game, and when you look at the box score their stats don't jump out at you. The player that leads the league in steals, isn't always the best defender. A player that leads the league in FG% doesn't have the best shot. The player that leads the league in 3pt% isn't always the best 3pt shooter. For instance, the best perimeter defenders are rarely among the leaders in steals or blocked shots. When Bruce Bowen was in the NBA, he was considered an elite defensive player. Meanwhile, defensive statistics show that a player like Allen Iverson, who was never an elite defender, was better. Bowen was a better defender, and had a greater defensive impact on the game but the box score can't quantify his contributions. My point is, a player can be statistically better than another player, but not be a better basketball player. It takes more than stats to accurately gauge a player's abilities, contributions, and skills.