My agenda is to put his game/performance in its proper context. Every time they lose, you're always quick to point the finger at him, reiterating that they need to trade him. I'm well aware and I acknowledge his limited scoring skillset and how that affects the team, but that's always overemphasized by his detractors, because it's much easier to distinguish scoring vs. everything else he brings to the table. A lot of his struggles on offense, particularly as the game went on was when fatigue set in; it's what happens, particularly when you're undersized and you have to do fulfill all the roles he does on defense.
It's easier to point to where he should've done better because his shots are literally recorded right there in the box score, but all the things he did defensively isn't, so naturally, folks are going to magnify what is right there in front of them on paper, and not accurately weigh his missed shots vs. his defense.
It's like if x-player shoots 10-15 for 26 points, but is horrific on the defensive end, more folks will perceive that player to have a good performance, than the reverse of that.
The point here is that, Draymond isn't to blame, well, to be more specific, he's not the main component which led the Lakers back into the game. Without his defense, the Lakers would've run away with that game in the first quarter.
Bazemore missed an open wiggins twice for the corner 3. One before Kerr called timeout and got trapped in the corner and the last play when kcp when to double Curry on the inbound leaving Wiggins for an open corner 3
