1) It’s based on the Clippers’ very best stretch of the season.
2) Vs a schedule that on average was way weaker than every single opponent they lost to.
3) You assume the team developed RELIABLE chemistry over those 13 games – the season data and eye-test, along with analytical pieces about the Clippers’ season contradict this.
4) You assume that this chemistry would have continued, after a long break, while adding several new rotation players.
5) The team would have performed completely differently based on that chemistry and rhythm ALONE. You disregard actual poor performances both individually (EG zero points, Norm 1-9 and 4-14, PG 3-15) and as a team (Mann -24, 9-43 shooting, 14 assists to 20 turnovers, a horrendous team defense vs the Kings…). Can’t just act as if chemistry alone not only continues but makes them shoot lights out vs the Warriors and turn a blowout into a win, they don’t turn it over vs Minnesota, find a way to stop the lethal Sacramento offense or suddenly hit their season-average from 3 when in fact the entire team was off.
6) You further disregard poor performances from other players (e.g. Bones, Morris, Coffey vs the Kings) and assume none of that happens without Russ or with better chemistry. That doesn’t make sense.
7) Lastly, we can’t assume the best-case scenario with regards to every single trade. We can’t assume Plumlee is NOT there when they had no chance vs the Warriors or when he had critical turnovers vs the Wolves but then IS there to survive the games where Zu wasn’t available. We can’t assume EG is there but didn’t shoot poorly or didn’t have zero points and then also assume he would have shot much better or scored double-digits when he didn’t. We can’t assume the front office didn’t trade for Bones (who disappointed so far) but Reggie Jackson is and the issues the Clippers had earlier with Reggie are all gone.

Sorry, it’s wild speculation where all the best-case scenarios hit at the same time. Buying a lottery ticket provides better odds.

But I’d like to focus on other points you made: the theory of Russ off the bench/Mann starting as well as staggering PG and Kawhi to play with Russ. Just like you I’d be curious to see this. Problem is the team added a lot of guys late in the season and getting RELIABLE answers to the theory is impossible in such few games. I’d love to see the experiment – over 50+ games, not with 21 games and now 13 remaining. Therefore I do believe Ty Lue does the sensible thing, creating as much continuity and familiarity as possible. Not the perfect approach, just one of the best that are available. Having Russ come off the bench immediately may have been better. The data you cite about the +7.8 net rating over a medium-large sample size looks intriguing (albeit vs an easy schedule). The other side of this will be important as well: how does Mann perform with the second unit and could Russ perform at the same level or better to OVERALL get the best possible results for the team. We don’t have answers to this part and won’t get those over the next 13 games.

What will matter for tomorrow: is Westbrook’s lack of shooting as much of a problem as in the first matchup? Will the rest of the team also shoot that poorly again? Will they get outworked and outhustled again? Can they successfully defend the Warriors?

Tomorrow’s game is one of the most fascinating playoff previews in my opinion.