Well to sum up what seems to be your most important point. If you don't want our opinions, posting it in the help section probably isn't the best idea. Perhaps asking a BB in the bugs forum will get you what you want.
Now on the off chance you'd like to hear my opinion...
I looked at both your team rosters, and you have one star player who is well above anyone on either team. He, on the other hand has more depth on his team.
Once you get past the one player you have that is better, the rest of his team looks to be in better shape DMI wise than yours. Especially the bigs.
Now onto the box score stats.
True, you had the advantage ent wise, but by how much is hard to say, especially since we don't know if he had possibly 11-12 ent?
Secondly, he has HCA which tends to generally kick in in the latter parts of the game. Perhaps he also has the PR manage with Crowd Involvement? We won't know.
Third, you got both GDP correct, and he got both wrong. From what I've read, the GDP affects the early (first quarter is mainly what I've heard) parts of the game the most, but wears off. It seems like it did exactly its job since you won the first quarter.
Lastly, when it comes to ratings you said you had better ratings, this can be interpreted as individual ratings, match up ratings (PP100), or team ratings.
You did not have better individual ratings
You Him
15 15
15 15
14 14.5
13.5 14
13 14
12.5 13.5
12 13.5
11.5 Need I go on?
To base everything off PP100 is not a good idea. Those ratings are just simulations of what your players would have scored had they taken 100 shots. Since your players did not take 100 shots, the large of law numbers did not take effect and did not produce those results as a result. (i.e. your player could have missed the first 20 shots but made the last 80 in the simulation, but if your player only took 10 shots in the game, you don't realize any points since the first 20 were all misses)... yes, this is a crude example.
Let's look at team ratings.
You chose motion vs his m2m
True, as it says in the guide, motion is effective vs m2m. However, the premise of m2m is that your player guards the opposing player of the same position which seems to work against you in this case
Your outside scoring was proficient (high) his perimeter defence was prominent (high) which indicates it was higher, I guess that is shown in your <25% rate of 3FG
His inside scoring was proficient (low) your inside defence was strong (low) which can be seen with all the shots AND free throws (which poor defending plays a contributing factor in) that he has made.
He had about a 29% 3FG which is not unheard of... you are just focusing in on the fact that his PF was 3/3. That's like saying his PG and SG combined were 0/7 even though they should be making them
Can't say much about your FT, maybe you don't have a lot on your Cs?
Then there is stamina, you fielded 8 players, he fielded 10. Assuming both your teams stamina are about the same, yours wold run lower faster, which results in poorer results from your players. This seems to happen towards the end of the game you know, when everyone has player a lot and decrease in performance starts to appear?
I think everything I said answers most of what you asked
Too long; didn't read:
His inside offence was better than your inside defence according to the stats; his top 3 scorers were insides and since you player m2m his inside guys beat your inside guys. Look at the shot distribution, most of his points were close to the rim.
His outside defence was rated better than your outside offence, and the fact that outside shots are farther from the rim, makes it harder to score and get second chance points.
You don't know his ent, he has HCA, and possibly a Crowd involvement PR manager. I don't mean to sound harsh, but if he didn't get both GDP wrong, I could seem his team beating your