Kevin Peyton: Do Spurs re-sign Mills and for how much?

[SAGirl]

"If you were San Antonio, what would you be comfortable with offering Patty Mills (http://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/4004/patty-mills) this offseason? Would it be reasonable to expect him to be at least a passable starting point guard in two seasons, after Tony Parker (http://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/1015/tony-parker)'s contract expires?" -- Evan Kirkpatrick
To take the latter question first, I think so. There's been some concern about whether Mills can succeed without Manu Ginobili (http://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/272/manu-ginobili) alongside him to share ballhandling duties. I don't think the statistical evidence backs that up. The Spurs have a slightly better offensive rating (and net rating) when Mills plays without Ginobili, per NBA.com/Stats (http://stats.nba.com/vs/advanced/#!?PlayerID=201988&VsPlayerID=1938), and such lineups that include Kawhi Leonard (http://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/6450/kawhi-leonard) have been more effective, posting a sizzling 115.6 offensive rating in 447 minutes (http://stats.nba.com/impact/advanced/#!?LineupIDs=202695~201988&VsLineupIDs=1938~2225~1627749&TeamID=1610612759&VsTeamID=1610612759). Some of that is probably Leonard and company beating up on second units, but we've also seen Mills finish several games recently.
Leonard's development into a viable shot creator makes it easier to compensate for the fact that Mills is not a natural playmaker, and Mills' shooting makes him a dangerous spot-up threat when Leonard isolates.
There are three issues here:


Mills' age (he'll be 30 before the 2018-19 season)

The possible development of Dejounte Murray (http://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/3907497/dejounte-murray) into a starting-caliber point guard

The ability for San Antonio to clear huge cap space in either the summer of 2018 or 2019, depending on whether LaMarcus Aldridge (http://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/2983/lamarcus-aldridge) and Danny Green (http://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/3988/danny-green) pick up 2018-19 player options, which is unlikely

A big one-year contract might be ideal for the Spurs in terms of retaining flexibility. Unfortunately, Mills will surely get multi-year offers from other teams, so realistically San Antonio would probably have to go at least two years. I'd probably be comfortable paying up to $30 million over that span, given how difficult it would be for the Spurs to replace Mills in free agency this summer.

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/18990898/kevin-pelton-weekly-nba-mailbag-including-bradley-beal

[SAGirl]

That amount that he suggests is $15 mill per season FYI

[apalisoc_9]

That's too much money.

[BatManu20]

He gone tbh.

[SAGirl]

A 39 year old Manu got $14 this season and reportedly took a discount since he was offered more.

The point Pelton finished with was that SA would be hard pressed to replace his production in FA.

Tea leaves on this one are hard to read.

[Robz4000]

Yeah, $15mil per is far too much. Like others have said, 4/40-50 makes more sense.

[spursistan]

Patty Mills isn't worth 15 millions under any circumstances..:lol

Paying that kind of money for a one-trick pony player who barely averaged 10 PPG twice in his career and never played over 22 MPG would mean PATFO have lost the plot for real..

[SAGirl]

^^^
It's possible he's gone then, if that's the mentality with the Spurs... I think the pelton point is that he gets a payday these two seasons to stay and leave flexibility for the 18-19 season.

I tend to think Spurs value him... but they must have a magic number. If they aren't going to make runs at FA this offseason or the next one it makes sense... Still it's possible he's gone too.

[sasaint]

I find it interesting that Kirkpatrick thinks it is unlikely that LMA AND Danny will pick up player options in 2018-19 (assuming they are both around).

[dabom]

He probably gets 3 year 13mil per.

[lilbthebasedgod]

He's not worth that but we don't have anyone else. Dejounte is more than one season away from being ready imo.

[dabom]

He's not worth that but we don't have anyone else. Dejounte is more than one season away from being ready imo.

Ready for what? :lol

[dabom]

You don't win championships getting rid of your talent.

[Robz4000]

No way Green doesn't pick up his player option imo, unless he wants to take a further paycut to help the team (which he shouldn't do, but I imagine in that circumstance the team would take care of him later down the line). He'll be on the decline physically, with a poor showing thus far on his new contract. Even with the money being thrown around the league right now I can't see a team.offering him a contract like he would've gotten a few years ago. LMA might be in the same boat, but he could still prolly fetch $20mil per year on a middling team and get a prime role if his game doesn't fall off a cliff.

[MaNu4Tres]

Murray will make up a lot of production at the back up PG spot in many other ways and on both ends

Let Mills get paid elsewhere

[mookie2001]

Zero dollars this dude is physically overmatched and wildly inconsistent

[TheGreatYacht]

I'd rather trade Green and give that money to Mills, then proceed to draft a SG in the first round. But if that doesn't happen.....

http://ww3.hdnux.com/photos/56/50/21/12223602/9/920x920.jpg

[vander]

15 mill, holy cow! bye bye Patty, steal money from some other franchise please.

[Raven]

nah, let him go.

[Spurs9]

Let him go

[bklynspursfan]

If dude comes up huge in the playoffs that could be the determining factor. Don't know if Patfo even know what their plans are yet.

[RD2191]

Mills is worthless on defense. He was a big reason why we lost the clips series a couple of seasons ago. They attack him every time he's on the floor.

[CGD]

Mills is worthless on defense. He was a big reason why we lost the clips series a couple of seasons ago. They attack him every time he's on the floor.

Well it's not a bad strategy to try to have Austin Rivers try to beat you. Problem is he plays like Michael Jordan against us, and then utter garbage against other teams.

[TDomination]

I'm sure Spurs want him back but obviously have a limit to how much they are willing to pay him.

I think that limit will be determined by 2 factors.

1) With how he performs this playoffs
2) With how they feel about Murray

Manu retiring or not retiring may also play a role.

[RD2191]

Well it's not a bad strategy to try to have Austin Rivers try to beat you. Problem is he plays like Michael Jordan against us, and then utter garbage against other teams.

Very true, but then again, scrubs going off on the spurs seems to happen often. :lol

[sasaint]

Very true, but then again, scrubs going off on the spurs seems to happen often. :lol

I know how frequently scrubs seem to go off on the Spurs because I watch their games. But without watching every NBA game, I wish there were some way to know how frequently scrubs go off on other teams - for comparison purposes. To a Spurs fan it certainly feels like scrubs go off on us much more than they do against other teams.

Seriously, every time I see Austin Rivers it is against the Spurs. So, I always wonder why we (or some team other than his daddy's team) don't make a run at him. :lol

[MaNu4Tres]

I know how frequently scrubs seem to go off on the Spurs because I watch their games. But without watching every NBA game, I wish there were some way to know how frequently scrubs go off on other teams - for comparison purposes. To a Spurs fan it certainly feels like scrubs go off on us much more than they do against other teams.

Its variance. And a big part of it is fans tend to only remember the good games " scrubs" go off and completely ignore the times they regress to their mean. Same thing with " clutch" shooters like Robert Horry. He's hit big shots but also failed to deliver more often than not in the playoffs during the course of his career. Fans only remember the shots that go in.

[CGD]

I know how frequently scrubs seem to go off on the Spurs because I watch their games. But without watching every NBA game, I wish there were some way to know how frequently scrubs go off on other teams - for comparison purposes. To a Spurs fan it certainly feels like scrubs go off on us much more than they do against other teams.

So true. A few that come to mind this season: Jamcycle Green, Tim hardaway jr., Coach's boy, buddy heild, and a few random Pels.

[Spur|n|Austin]

As already stated and pretty much the consensus, his market value will more than Spurs are/able willing to afford. The future is Murray.

That's not to say I would like for Mills to take a friendly offer like Danny did and stick around because he loves it here. Doubt that though; go get paid homie.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

The $15M/year Pelton is referring to is I think under the premise of a 2-year deal. I can't see Mills getting the rate of 3 years/$45M or more. If he gets a +3 year deal, it'll probably be more like 3 years/$36M ala Jeremy Lin, which I think is a very good comp for him as far as overall production. Lin's creativity may actually put him above Mills and may be the starting point of offering Mills something less, like 3 years/$33M or something similar. Mills is a good player, but I would be surprised if another team offers him a huge contract. The only way I can see it happening is if a team with summer expectations completely flops and needs to just make a deal (e.g. if NOP were to lose Holiday and was desperate to find a player that may be able to please Cousins enough to sign a long-term deal).

That being said, I think the Spurs should only re-sign Mills on a 1- or 2-year deal. If he wants more than that, things get tougher. The only backcourt reserve under contract would be Murray. Manu is probably gone. Retaining Simmons would probably require a big salary increase (though not as much as Mills). Do they cough up the money for Mills and Simmons for the sake of continuity, or do they slide Murray into the rotation and gamble on this year's draft pick and free agents (Tim Hardaway Jr.? Ian Clark? Justin Holiday? Bring back Forbes?) to fill out the rest of the backcourt? The current makeup of the team puts a huge roster turnover on the line this summer.

[SpursIndonesia]

That's too much money.

Perhaps, but that's the going rate for a passable PG & decent shooter in today's NBA, Dellavedova got that kind of money last summer, right ?

I really, really hope that Dijon can develop much faster & realizing his potential, becoming a true perimeter side kick for Kawhi, so we won't waste another year of his peak years by being a mediocre contender.

[davi78239]

I let him walk tbh. Spurs more than likely can't afford him anyway. Develop Murray and get G. Hill back in Manu's place (assuming he does retire)

[TheDoctor]

4/40 or let him walk tbh. He prob ends up in Philly or OKC.

[kaji157]

3 years 26 million, 3rd year being player option. Frontloaded if possible.

1st $9,122,807, 2nd $8,666,667, 3rd $8,210,526 (player option)

[illusioNtEk]

Time for Murray to step up and hit that 3

[benefactor]

Thanks for everything Patty. Go get your money...you've earned it.

[kaji157]

I don't understand this forum really. A lot of people complain that this year guard rotation is bad and slim, still want to replace patty with Murray on the hopes he is a viable nba player.
Talk about inconsistency.
Patty will stay a Spur because nor Tony nor Murray are consistent options at point guard, and because the market won't be great on pgs.
Unless the spurs pull a steal on next market i expect patty to resign.

[GSH]

I'd rather trade Green and give that money to Mills


By trade, you mean dump? If they trade and take back salary, they won't have that money to give to Mills. No matter what some people think of Danny, at $10M he is a cheap starter these days. If you get back another player making $10M, he probably isn't as good as Danny.

Like it or not, the Spurs are paying Tony's salary next year. There's on PG. Murray may be as good a distributor as Patty right now. He obviously lacks Patty's shooting ability - but then again, Patty can't hold a candle to Murray in penetrating and/or getting to the rim. On a per-36 minute basis, Murray scores just about as much as Patty. He just does it a much different way. And, of course, we don't know if he can maintain for longer minutes, or against starter-caliber defenders. And speaking of defense... can Murray be much worse than Patty on the defensive end?

I think your picture has the Spurs top two PG's for next year, and they will try and sign another older veteran to fill out the rest of the minutes. Maybe they can arrange a S&T with Patty, to get some value out of losing him. But I don't think they will be able to offer him what another team will. And they aren't known for guaranteeing starter minutes, which is something I think Patty wants in his career.

[dabom]

By trade, you mean dump? If they trade and take back salary, they won't have that money to give to Mills. No matter what some people think of Danny, at $10M he is a cheap starter these days. If you get back another player making $10M, he probably isn't as good as Danny.

Like it or not, the Spurs are paying Tony's salary next year. There's on PG. Murray may be as good a distributor as Patty right now. He obviously lacks Patty's shooting ability - but then again, Patty can't hold a candle to Murray in penetrating and/or getting to the rim. On a per-36 minute basis, Murray scores just about as much as Patty. He just does it a much different way. And, of course, we don't know if he can maintain for longer minutes, or against starter-caliber defenders. And speaking of defense... can Murray be much worse than Patty on the defensive end?

I think your picture has the Spurs top two PG's for next year, and they will try and sign another older veteran to fill out the rest of the minutes. Maybe they can arrange a S&T with Patty, to get some value out of losing him. But I don't think they will be able to offer him what another team will. And they aren't known for guaranteeing starter minutes, which is something I think Patty wants in his career.

You talk about defense and offense and lack to talk about impact. GTFO faggot. :lmao

I can show you many cancers than can get points. It's not about raw stats you stupid fuck. :lmao

[lilbthebasedgod]

Ready for what? :lol
Ready to be consistently a more solid contributor than Patty Mills.

[dabom]

Ready to be consistently a more solid contributor than Patty Mills.

On what grounds? You "feel" it? :lmao

[TheGreatYacht]

By trade, you mean dump? If they trade and take back salary, they won't have that money to give to Mills. No matter what some people think of Danny, at $10M he is a cheap starter these days. If you get back another player making $10M, he probably isn't as good as Danny.

Like it or not, the Spurs are paying Tony's salary next year. There's on PG. Murray may be as good a distributor as Patty right now. He obviously lacks Patty's shooting ability - but then again, Patty can't hold a candle to Murray in penetrating and/or getting to the rim. On a per-36 minute basis, Murray scores just about as much as Patty. He just does it a much different way. And, of course, we don't know if he can maintain for longer minutes, or against starter-caliber defenders. And speaking of defense... can Murray be much worse than Patty on the defensive end?

I think your picture has the Spurs top two PG's for next year, and they will try and sign another older veteran to fill out the rest of the minutes. Maybe they can arrange a S&T with Patty, to get some value out of losing him. But I don't think they will be able to offer him what another team will. And they aren't known for guaranteeing starter minutes, which is something I think Patty wants in his career.
I agree with everything you said tbh, and yes I meant dump Danny for a 1st round pick

[TD 21]

You talk about defense and offense and lack to talk about impact. GTFO faggot. :lmao

I can show you many cancers than can get points. It's not about raw stats you stupid fuck. :lmao

It's amazing to me how many people don't understand that this sport is not like the others. You can't really seek out certain numbers or stat pad in them, but this one is different.

PPG is one of the most irrelevant stats in sports, especially for role players (and even some stars), since it's largely tied to mpg and usage.

For example, if you swapped Mills with Thomas or Walker and gave him their mpg and usage, he wouldn't score as much as them because he's not as complete a scorer, but he'd probably average high teens. It wouldn't matter though because he'd still be the same player.

A similar player (and one I could see the Spurs signing as an inexpensive replacement, if they lose Mills) is Brooks, who in '10 averaged 20 ppg and won MIP . . . and outside of that season, he's been a career backup.

This notion that if they replace Mills with a supposedly more well rounded player, they'll be better off, ignores the fact that this team labors to score, but is already the best defensive and one of the better rebounding teams.

[lilbthebasedgod]

On what grounds? You "feel" it? :lmao
The grounds that he's objectively terrible right now. On what grounds do you "feel" the opposite?

[dabom]

The grounds that he's objectively terrible right now. On what grounds do you "feel" the opposite?

"Terrible" :lmao

[FkLA]

The problem with ST is that y'all want to arbitrarily set the value of players. Or get a hometown discount on everything. That's not how it works. Y'all didn't even want to give Kawhichael the max a couple years ago.

[FkLA]

I also find it funny that the little excerpt in the OP shits on the Porker crews argument that MVPaddy can't survive without the great Emmanuel Ginobili by his side. :lol

[cjw]

Spurs have his Bird rights so he only costs $6.8 million against the cap until they work out a deal. They can then pay him whatever they want, so long as they don't need to renounce him to make a big signing. Given Bird rights I think it's much more likely he stays than Dedmon.

And to those saying Green will definitely opt in (18-19) because he'll have to take a pay cut otherwise, you have no clue how little talent there is at his position across the league and how valuable players like him are. He may opt out to grab more years sooner, or even to test his value on the market. He will certainly get more than the $10 million he's getting today barring a collapse.

[kaji157]

Spurs have his Bird rights so he only costs $6.8 million against the cap until they work out a deal. They can then pay him whatever they want, so long as they don't need to renounce him to make a big signing. Given Bird rights I think it's much more likely he stays than Dedmon.

And to those saying Green will definitely opt in (18-19) because he'll have to take a pay cut otherwise, you have no clue how little talent there is at his position across the league and how valuable players like him are. He may opt out to grab more years sooner, or even to test his value on the market. He will certainly get more than the $10 million he's getting today barring a collapse.

Yes, but you cannot get a good free agent even then. One of the cap experts may confirm this if they want but i am pretty sure that the spurs salary projection including mills cap hold and renouncing Manu and Simmons will stand at 101 millions.
Latest projections set the 2017/18 cap at 102 millions with the luxury tax line at 122 m.
So even then the spurs really have very few room to maneuver with.
I feel patty will command as said between 8 and 9 millions a year and at least 3 years. That really is not so bad as the spurs would have a few trade assets, some players already developing in Austin and Murray.
There would be a big hole if Manu retires but that was bound to happen.
I feel J. Crawford contract 2 years at 30 million with a third year a player option is a bit above what he should have gotten and is a good measure for patty as jamal is a more accomplished and seasoned player.

[urunobili]

3 for 35 TBH

[GSH]

I can show you many cancers than can get points. It's not about raw stats you stupid fuck. :lmao


Then never talk numbers/stats on here again. Never. You can't have it both ways.

The question isn't whether or not Patty is a good player. The question is whether the Spurs can afford to keep him and all the other talent they need on the floor. The Spurs have to pay Tony Parker $15.4M next season, whether you like it or not. They have a promising young PG in Murray, who is going to cost $1.3M.

Patty is a 6-foot-tall 2 guard, who has been pressed into service as a point. The article this thread is based on suggests paying Patty $30M for 2 years. They can't shell out that much and still round out the roster. And they can't shell out that much for a 6-foot shooting guard, no matter how much "impact" you think he has. Six-foot shooting guards may work on your dumbshit fantasy team, but they don't work in the NBA. Patty has survived being a half-assed PG, because he's a backup, and he can shoot the 3. I don't hate him, but that's the reality.

You can say "faggot" all you want, and throw out a bunch of sweet little emojis. If someone wants to throw $15M per at Patty, he's not going to be wearing silver and black next year. And if I'm wrong and they do, you'll be whining like a little bitch all season about how they don't have enough at the wing, and how much you miss Dedmon. It's not fantasy league, and there's a salary cap.

[spurraider21]

he realistically should have been gone a couple years ago but his shoulder injury/surgery let us hang onto him

[MaNu4Tres]

GSH with the goods.

[dabom]

Then never talk numbers/stats on here again. Never. You can't have it both ways.

The question isn't whether or not Patty is a good player. The question is whether the Spurs can afford to keep him and all the other talent they need on the floor. The Spurs have to pay Tony Parker $15.4M next season, whether you like it or not. They have a promising young PG in Murray, who is going to cost $1.3M.

Patty is a 6-foot-tall 2 guard, who has been pressed into service as a point. The article this thread is based on suggests paying Patty $30M for 2 years. They can't shell out that much and still round out the roster. And they can't shell out that much for a 6-foot shooting guard, no matter how much "impact" you think he has. Six-foot shooting guards may work on your dumbshit fantasy team, but they don't work in the NBA. Patty has survived being a half-assed PG, because he's a backup, and he can shoot the 3. I don't hate him, but that's the reality.

You can say "faggot" all you want, and throw out a bunch of sweet little emojis. If someone wants to throw $15M per at Patty, he's not going to be wearing silver and black next year. And if I'm wrong and they do, you'll be whining like a little bitch all season about how they don't have enough at the wing, and how much you miss Dedmon. It's not fantasy league, and there's a salary cap.

I don't think you understand faggot. It's about many more things combined. Not just raw stats. :lmao

[dabom]

GSH with the goods.

Blow it up still? :lol

[dabom]

The problem with ST is that y'all want to arbitrarily set the value of players. Or get a hometown discount on everything. That's not how it works. Y'all didn't even want to give Kawhichael the max a couple years ago.

:lol

[TD 21]

Then never talk numbers/stats on here again. Never. You can't have it both ways.

The question isn't whether or not Patty is a good player. The question is whether the Spurs can afford to keep him and all the other talent they need on the floor. The Spurs have to pay Tony Parker $15.4M next season, whether you like it or not. They have a promising young PG in Murray, who is going to cost $1.3M.

Patty is a 6-foot-tall 2 guard, who has been pressed into service as a point. The article this thread is based on suggests paying Patty $30M for 2 years. They can't shell out that much and still round out the roster. And they can't shell out that much for a 6-foot shooting guard, no matter how much "impact" you think he has. Six-foot shooting guards may work on your dumbshit fantasy team, but they don't work in the NBA. Patty has survived being a half-assed PG, because he's a backup, and he can shoot the 3. I don't hate him, but that's the reality.

You can say "faggot" all you want, and throw out a bunch of sweet little emojis. If someone wants to throw $15M per at Patty, he's not going to be wearing silver and black next year. And if I'm wrong and they do, you'll be whining like a little bitch all season about how they don't have enough at the wing, and how much you miss Dedmon. It's not fantasy league, and there's a salary cap.

This fan base loves to get worked up over this team losing key players, even though they've consistently done the opposite. People panicked about Splitter in '13, Diaw and Mills in '14 and Green in '15. The only time, in recent memory, that they lost key players, was to upgrade them (Hill for Leonard, Splitter to sign Aldridge, Diaw to sign Gasol).

It's possible they lose Mills, of course, but why would you doubt them given their track record? $15M is probably unlikely, but even if it's true, Green turned that down to take $10M. Maybe Mills wouldn't, but maybe he would. Maybe they convince Gasol to pull a Jefferson, maybe they don't see Dedmon as much more than a MLE (starting at $8.4M) player and aren't willing to break the bank to keep him.

As an aside, if they lose the latter, I could see them targeting Nogueira via trade.

[Drom John]

Basketball Insiders: 2017 Free Agent Rankings: Point Guards (http://www.basketballinsiders.com/2017-free-agent-rankings-point-guards/)

First tier:
1) Stephen Curry
2) Chris Paul
3) Kyle Lowry
4) George Hill

Second Tier:
5) Patty Mills
6) Jrue Holiday
7) Jeff Teague
8) Darren Collison
9) Derrick Rose

Tier 3:
11) Yogi Ferrell
12) T.J. McConnell
13) Ty Lawson
14) Deron Williams
15) Rajon Rondo

[gambit1990]

Basketball Insiders: 2017 Free Agent Rankings: Point Guards (http://www.basketballinsiders.com/2017-free-agent-rankings-point-guards/)

First tier:
1) Stephen Curry
2) Chris Paul
3) Kyle Lowry
4) George Hill

Second Tier:
5) Patty Mills
6) Jrue Holiday
7) Jeff Teague
8) Darren Collison
9) Derrick Rose

Tier 3:
11) Yogi Ferrell
12) T.J. McConnell
13) Ty Lawson
14) Deron Williams
15) Rajon Rondo
from the article: "Parker ranks no higher than 40th among NBA point guards in net differential, BPM and PER." :lmao

[DPG21920]

If people know that the Spurs backcourt isn't good enough (per most on here) to win a title, and we know Mills best still isn't as good as TP's best, why then would you think that paying Mills more money would solve the problem?

[palangi]

I don't understand this forum really. A lot of people complain that this year guard rotation is bad and slim, still want to replace patty with Murray on the hopes he is a viable nba player.
Talk about inconsistency.
Patty will stay a Spur because nor Tony nor Murray are consistent options at point guard, and because the market won't be great on pgs.
Unless the spurs pull a steal on next market i expect patty to resign.And Mills is consistant?

[TD 21]

If people know that the Spurs backcourt isn't good enough (per most on here) to win a title, and we know Mills best still isn't as good as TP's best, why then would you think that paying Mills more money would solve the problem?

It wouldn't solve the problem, but it would help to maintain status quo and it wouldn't block Murray, since they can pair together.

If they let him walk, they'll have no means with which to replace him.

In the unlikely event something significant comes up at some point in the next few years and they feel they need to move him to facilitate it, as we've seen, you can always offload a quality asset without taking back salary.

[gambit1990]

at the very least the spurs should've let patty start for a stint, if only to evaluate.

now they're in a position where parker will be worse next year, murray is still raw, and they might lose patty? :lol

[DPG21920]

I'm in the camp that believes SA will prioritize keeping Mills

[DPG21920]

at the very least the spurs should've let patty start for a stint, if only to evaluate.

now they're in a position where parker will be worse next year, murray is still raw, and they might lose patty? :lol

He did get a stint to start and it didn't really go well.

[gambit1990]

He did get a stint to start and it didn't really go well.
:lmao

he's only started 7 games this season. and no, not 7 in a row. so no, he hasn't had a stint.

he also averages 6 assists per game when he starts. 1.3 more than parker.

[DPG21920]

Well, if raw boxscore assists were all that matters then he'd be viewed as a starter by every team. Especially if he was better than Parker.

[dabom]

Well, if raw boxscore assists were all that matters then he'd be viewed as a starter by every team. Especially if he was better than Parker.

He's better than porker. Sometimes the better player on the Spurs doesn't start. Almost like you don't know shit about the Spurs. :lmao

[gambit1990]

Well, if raw boxscore assists were all that matters then he'd be viewed as a starter by every team. Especially if he was better than Parker.
OBPM, DBPM, BPM, VORP
tony: -0.9, -1.8, -2.7, -0.3
patty: 2.9, -1.4, 1.5, 1.4

[DPG21920]

He's better than porker. Sometimes the better player on the Spurs doesn't start. Almost like you don't know shit about the Spurs. :lmao

He's not the better PG - he's the better player (and even that is questionable to me). It's more of a floor/consistency vs ceiling argument. When healthy, TP is still the superior player but TP doesn't stay healthy very much these days.

[gambit1990]

He's better than porker. Sometimes the better player on the Spurs doesn't start. Almost like you don't know shit about the Spurs. :lmao
:lol

[DPG21920]

OBPM, DBPM, BPM, VORP
tony: -0.9, -1.8, -2.7, -0.3
patty: 2.9, -1.4, 1.5, 1.4

ive seen the stats. Mills benefits greatly from playing against worse players. Why do you think Pop doesn't give him a chance to start? If you think it's because he's loyal to TP, then why would you pay Mills knowing TP will still be here?

Also, I've shown you, with the SAME starting lineup that TP plays with, when you put Mills in that lineup over TP it's worse than with TP.

[gambit1990]

I've shown you, with the SAME starting lineup that TP plays with, when you put Mills in that lineup over TP it's worse than with TP.
parker has much more experience playing with the starting lineup... whatever numbers you're referring to... they should be better. at least you found a stat you can cling onto.

[dabom]

Patty already closes games cause he is the superior player. Starting him should be a formality by now.

[TheGreatYacht]

Spurs are 4-3 when the microwave starts. Aldridge is also shit when there's no Parker.

But sure, let's listen to the forum jizzrags :lol

[DPG21920]

parker has much more experience playing with the starting lineup... whatever numbers you're referring to... they should be better. at least you found a stat you can cling onto.

Patty has had plenty of time with the unit - that excuse doesn't fly. It's the same reason you see LMA have a drastic drop next to Mills. Sure, it's less time than TP, but still a solid amount of time. Read into what that means.

While you are correct that the time Mills has had as a STARTER with that unit is less than TP, the calculations with Mills with that same lineup isn't about just starting. It's all time on the court with them. Mills has been closing plenty of games with that lineup and overall, just having Mills in over TP with the starters is worse.

[DPG21920]

Also, the start Patty crew has yet to answer my questions: Why is it that Pop doesn't start Mills other than the 7 game opportunity he's had?

If your answer to that is because he's too loyal to TP, then why isn't TP closing the games like Pau (whom Pop put off the bench)? Also, if that's your answer, and TP is still going to be here, why would you pay Mills KNOWING that?

[benfti]

Also, the start Patty crew has yet to answer my questions: Why is it that Pop doesn't start Mills other than the 7 game opportunity he's had?

If your answer to that is because he's too loyal to TP, then why isn't TP closing the games like Pau (whom Pop put off the bench)? Also, if that's your answer, and TP is still going to be here, why would you pay Mills KNOWING that?
I will go with Mills is the engine room of the second unit and you don't put all your eggs in one basket.

[SAGirl]

Well..
this is not a continuation for the Kevin Pelton argument that Mills could be worth 15 mill per season, but it's another find in the same vein.


What’s instructive of this list is that Mills has performed like the 43rd-most valuable player in the league, and that salary is $17 million, which should give you an idea of the type of contract he’ll be looking to land this summer as a free agent. He’s not a Jokic-level heist, but not that far off, and we’re lucky to have him for at least a bit longer.
http://www.poundingtherock.com/2017/3/29/15097864/about-those-overpaid-spurs-stars

Good article if you have some time to read... just interesting to see what guys are producing relatively to their salary.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

No way will the Spurs give Mills 17 million a year, nor should they.

[140]

:lol they're paying porker 15M so 17 for MVPatty is only fair tbh

[dabom]

:lol they're paying porker 15M so 17 for MVPatty is only fair tbh

My nigs. :lol

[Seventyniner]

Well..
this is not a continuation for the Kevin Pelton argument that Mills could be worth 15 mill per season, but it's another find in the same vein.


http://www.poundingtherock.com/2017/3/29/15097864/about-those-overpaid-spurs-stars

Good article if you have some time to read... just interesting to see what guys are producing relatively to their salary.

Good article, thanks for posting. It agrees with a hunch I've had: Parker is somewhat overpaid but looks grossly overpaid because of how grossly underpaid Mills is.

[gambit1990]

Well..
this is not a continuation for the Kevin Pelton argument that Mills could be worth 15 mill per season, but it's another find in the same vein.


http://www.poundingtherock.com/2017/3/29/15097864/about-those-overpaid-spurs-stars

Good article if you have some time to read... just interesting to see what guys are producing relatively to their salary.
production rank:
#1 harden
#2 westbrook
#3 kawhi
...
#43. patty
...
#81 tony :lmao

damn, even old ass manu's at #57 :lol

[cjw]

Posted over in Think Tank but since nobody reads it, this is somewhat relevant here:

850157030476308480

[SAGirl]

^^ Not sure what that means for Patty, but I think it does mean the time to go after blockbuster FA may be at an end. It affects not just the Spurs but the other teams too. The market boom may be stalled.

[phxspurfan]

10 Mills, nothing more


Mills.