Dealing with wario in singles is much different than dealing with him in doubles. There are alot of characters that have to be dealt with in a different fashion in singles and doubles. And my point is that while viewing doubles as far as overall player accomplishments is a great idea, its NOT going to be done the right way, atleast right now.
For some, it may be obvious. Their teams matches are recorded, and everyone stands around to watch them. But for others...how do we know? It's not something that the community has been really big on, so now only those who are KNOWN as great teamates will get those extra points. Ksizzle isn't known as a really good teamate, but Inui is, so Ksizzle loses? But Ksizzle hasn't really had the chance to team with someone on his skill level for months and months, to establish chemistry and team strats. This is just one example of how saying " O Im great in teams" is unfair.
Define a great teamate. I would like to see a desired damage output/taken ratio. Average stock lifetime, average stock taking, etc. We don't know which players in NJ are performing the best in teams, because its all subjective.
I've heard TONS of people say how this person sucks in teams, and wasn't a problem. When Inui and atomsk fought spam and M2k, Inui would say that spam wasnt the problem at all and was hardly contributing. Spam of course disagreed, and claimed he was ****** Inui. Who is telling the truth? How do we know who is actually performing at an impressive level? Are we just looking at wins? We KNOW that the win isnt due to the effort of ONE single player, so how can we, at this point in time, act like we can use a teams rep that has in no way shape or form been factually proven, to give the edge to one player over another?