I have often thought the same thing. I also believe that the numbers are a bit misleading. People criticize Green and Bradley for being the primary scorers for a bad team, but what is Love doing? Lee plays with Curry, Thompson, Iggy, and Bogut and still manages to put up almost 20 ppg on a solid mid-range playoff team in the West. Let's also not forget that Lee was third team All-NBA last year...yes, it's true.
I obviously realize that Love is the better player, but there isn't such a huge differential. The fact that people think Lee's contract is an albatross is kind of laughable. He is a very productive player and does a lot of things well. He isn't the type to lead your team to a championship, but he can be a very valuable piece.
Here's the counter to your first paragraph. Love scores more, but is also more efficient (59% TS vs. 57%) despite not having the offensive talent around them. Playing on a bad team may afford a player more opportunities (like Bradley) but it generally affords you worse opportunities. On Golden State, Stephen Curry is the one who takes the bulk of the bad, bailout shots, because he's the best shooter and can make them sometimes. On Minnesota, that is often Love's job. To perform at his offensive efficiency, despite the lack of some support, is a point in Love's favor, not Lee's.
Topic: How much better is Kevin Love than David Lee? (Read 2413 times)