I really don't to argue with you but you have to make me by saying dumb things.. okay so .. here's where your thinking is dumb, again.
Just because one rock is blue it doesn't mean all rocks blue.
What's the difference between a player with a 17.9 PER in a 1st role, and a 28.9 in a 4th? Role determined by amount of touches. ie shots, attempts, possession, usage .. consider that a player in the 1st role has the ball in his hand more often is more important to his team and with a 17.9 is under-performing compared to his competition.
Then consider that the player in question was a noted chemistry problem since HS, and had issues while at OSU, while the player you are referring to by all accounts is noted as a good teammate and liked by his peers.
if you want to talk crap, I'm game.. you're weak. If you want to argue, come up with a thoughtful argument. Don't mix the two.. Besides that go away .. you're annoying.