Of course not. As you said in that very sentence, it happened by magic. I think you're discounting player variance. Every performance a player has isn't a stable level of performance that he could consistently have under some set of circumstances (unless we count "being more talented" as a set of circumstances). Players have certain talent-based medians and they deviate from it, above and below, from time to time. Very rarely, they will deviate from it massively. That's how you get "Tony Buckets" (as Tony Delk named himself after his 50+ point explosion). It doesn't mean that Tony Delk could be Tony Buckets if he was simply given the primary scorer role. It means that Delk had one night where everything was going right. Blake has had a few quarters where everything was going right. Webster has had one quarter. Their established level of performance, though, is quite a bit different. Well, you're perfectly entitled to your evaluation of Webster's talent. Personally, I think that the team has hoped for that for a while and has given Webster plenty of shots off screens. When he was drafted, he was expected to be a catch-and-shoot artist and the team certainly gave him opportunities. He wasn't buried on the bench. He averaged over 17 minutes per game as a 19 year old rookie and was over 20 minutes per game as a second year player. He was nearly averaging 30 minutes per game by year three. I don't think Webster's failings come from lack of opportunity or having his game misunderstood.
Blake learn from Miller though to feed Oden. He finally has done it the last couple games. Now just keep feeding Oden!
Why worry about stats when some of my favorite posters on this forum, judge players on a game by game basis and not on a season or a career? I sometimes wonder if we secretly have Bill Walton posting on this forum.
