such a dumb response by so many on here..obviously its Sully..lee is 32 years old sully is 23..in what 15 min today sully had 14 points on 70% shooting and yet most of you on here too busy looking at his body ..he plays well high bball iq and a lot more potential..this shouldnt even be a question..the fact that sully wasnt starting today makes me want to slap stevens
Why so obvious?
Lee had 13 points, 7 rebounds and 3 assists in 21 minutes and shot 62%.
Sully had 14 points, 4 rebounds and 1 assist in 15 minutes and shot 70%
If you look at those numbers across the board, both come out roughly on par.
Having watched the game though, it was blatantly obvious that Lee had more impact. Every time he got on the floor he was aggressive in making things happen. He was constantly creating offense - partly with his own scoring, but even more so by generating opportunities for others. It honestly felt like Lee had a hand in everything that happened while he was on the court.
Sully on the other hand was much more passively involved in the game. He wasn't really aggressive in creating opportunities. It seemed like most of the time he was just the beneficiary of somebody else's hard work - he was getting a ton of easy looks around the basket, and all he really had to do was finish them.
The basic stats might show Sully as having as much impact as Lee, but if you want a better reflection of their roles in the game just look at the +/- stats. Lee led the team with a +22 while Sully's +5 was equal last on the team.
I know people hate +/- but if you actually watch this game, I think most would say that's a pretty accurate reflection of the impact those guys had. Same with Crowder, Smart, Bradley, Thomas and Johnson - all of those guys made a huge impact every time the stepped on the court, and their +/- numbers reflected that.
The only guy who I feel wasn't accurately was Mickey, who I felt had a much more positive impact than his +6 suggests. Albiet he only played garbage time minutes, so that obviously brought impacted that number.
In his defense I did like some things I saw from Sully. I liked that he played far more inside and far less on the perimeter - that's something I've been wanting from him for ages now. I also felt he seemed better conditioned. He didn't really look very noticeably thinner, but he didn't seem go through the usual stages of sloppiness / laziness that he tends to go through as he fatigues through the course of a game. That could indicate improved conditioning, or it could just be the fact that he only played 15 minutes.
Either way I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, and if he can convince me that he can do both of the above (play more inside and play with more consistent energy) then I'll be rooting for him.
Regardless, Lee is still the better player.