If you want to split hairs on Andrew’s opinion, that’s fine. We can talk about whether the dip in 3% in conference play was due to better coaching/scouting and defenders denying Robinson open looks or his increased minutes and role (not just having the luxury of camping out on the wing and looking for kickouts). That’s a conversation that I wouldn’t mind having here, and I’m sure someone less lazy than me might even crunch those numbers.
I wouldn’t give any credit to the commenter, though, who seems to come from the growing army who somehow think less Duncan is good and no Duncan is even better. This is a comment in an article where Andrew suggests that getting Duncan off the schneid is one of several ways for Michigan to optimize its offense. It’s no great leap of logic, but one that was still met with several folks saying “nah”. Perhaps I should have emphasized the end of his argument (Off the bench you can get lost in a scouting report. Especially if you rarely play.), since that was the part that really boggled my mind at the time.