And how many of those 36 points were coming off offensive turnovers that presented the opponent with a short field? Hell most of the points scored by the opponent in the Atlanta, Seattle and Cleveland game came off offensive turnovers. We just got lucky in the Atlanta game. Yet somehow we should ignore that even though when they Win it's a "team stat" and when they lose it's all because of the defense.
First, all those turnovers are not on Dak, so it's false to claim that constitutes Dak folding, plus it doesn't change the fact that Dak played well.
Second, it's a false claim that most of the points Atlanta, Seattle and Cleveland scored were off offensive turnovers. Granted oo many points were scored off turnovers, but even if you take out the points off turnovers in those games the defense still gave up an average of 27 points, which is terrible. Besides, you would have hoped that at least once in awhile the defense would actually have stepped up rather than rolling over and putting it all on the offense.
Winning and losing is always a team stat. What I said was that a weak defense had something to do with the losses. What you said was the losses were all on Dak. Accordingly you are the one ignoring that wins and losses are on the team as a whole.
