'Starter' is an over-rated measure that I frankly don't understand. Obviously, minutes matter most. However, even then is it better to be the #3 option for 20 minutes or is it better to start, play 25 minutes and be the #5 option the entire time? Not saying that is exactly the case here but just trying to highlight how myopic it is to just look at who's "starting."

I wonder how the coaches consider the relationship between the stats and the scheme. Example: last year TJ Haws took some ill-advised threes and could have taken a step or two closer and, perhaps, increased his probability of making his shots. However, he shot >40% which is the equivalent of 60% from inside the arc. Is it better that TJ is 'wasting' fewer possessions but shooting a lower percentage? The example is even more extreme for Zac.