Murray...take the keys

[Chinook]

They increased his priority, but it was still stop Parker at all costs. Do you watch basketball dude? :lol

I feel like you don't. Tony was hurt in 2013's Finals. He certainly wasn't playing like an MVP candidate then.

[SAGirl]

all this discussion on offense is interesting and all but my focus is what DAF86 mentioned (and Manu4tres among others) that defensively Danny/Murray do not have weaknesses. Whereas if you play Murray with an undersized SG like Patty or Bryn, the team will still be fine but won't be great bc of Patty/Bryn defensive limitations, getting posted up by guards, etc. Murray is a starting caliber PG as Danny is a starting caliber SG. They may play with different lineups etc, but they will be at their very best at their ideal spots with a proper complement. In the bench you can hide some defensive liabilities if they can score, and even these sometimes need minutes limited if they are getting exploited in the playoffs.

[dabom]

I feel like you don't. Tony was hurt in 2013's Finals. He certainly wasn't playing like an MVP candidate then.

Even when parker was shit in 2014, he still commanded that respect from Lebron. In 2013, it was all Tony dude, he had the magic then, hurt or not hurt.

Anything else is revisionist history.

[dabom]

all this discussion on offense is interesting and all but my focus is what DAF86 mentioned (and Manu4tres among others) that defensively Danny/Murray do not have weaknesses. Whereas if you play Murray with an undersized SG like Patty or Bryn, the team will still be fine but won't be great bc of Patty/Bryn defensive limitations, getting posted up by guards, etc. Murray is a starting caliber PG as Danny is a starting caliber SG. They may play with different lineups etc, but they will be at their very best at their ideal spots with a proper complement. In the bench you can hide some defensive liabilities if they can score, and even these sometimes need minutes limited if they are getting exploited in the playoffs.

Being a smaller player doesn't mean you are a negative player you stupid fuck. You just alluded to that. :lmao

[SAGirl]

Being a smaller player doesn't mean you are a negative player you stupid fuck. You just alluded to that. :lmao
you stupid fuck ^^^??

Are you going to argue Patty/Forbes are defensive players, are you going to say they are starting caliber SG? ARe you saying they are better than Danny? bc if you are... you stupid fuck... I care nothing for your ignorance. :lmao

[MaNu4Tres]

Murray does his part, but he's not the HOTS or anything (by that I mean the literal acronym, not Parker). Most teams aren't going to react too quickly, which is why Murray has been played by worse defenders than Green has so far. Most coaches gameplan to stop Green from shooting, and if they do it right, they can stop him with a bad defender if that defender plays disciplined D. However, a Green that posts up, takes guys off the dribble and fires good passes requires a better guy.

In 2013, Green was checked by Steph until Game 3 when he dominated Curry on the boards and beat him up on screens. It forced them to switch Klay off Tony, because their first option was getting wrecked on both ends and eventually went out with injury. A similar thing has to happen to give Murray favorable match-ups. Sure, he may be good enough to score regardless, but that's a different debate.

Most teams don't have two great wing defenders to check Kawhi and Murray. The best will defend Kawhi. And DeJounte gets to hound the point guard on defense -- where, not only himself, but the the team has a huge edge when he's the man defending the PG. Go look up the defensive advance stats with him on/off the floor without Kawhi. He's becoming a monster on that end right before our eyes and no he wouldn't have that kind of impact chasing around and defending players bigger than him. As I said since last season the point guard position is where he has the highest ceiling, and no he would't have the same impact on D defending bigger players.

[Chinook]

Even when parker was shit in 2014, he still commanded that respect from Lebron. In 2013, it was all Tony dude, he had the magic then, hurt or not hurt.

Anything else is revisionist history.

He didn't. Green was on his way to a possible fMVP while Tony was shooing in the low 40s. Sure, Parker passed better than Manu did, but of course, who didn't? Tony went for about 16 points on about 18 possessions.

[dabom]

you stupid fuck ^^^??

Are you going to argue Patty/Forbes are defensive players, are you going to say they are starting caliber SG? ARe you saying they are better than Danny? bc if you are... you stupid fuck... I care nothing for your ignorance. :lmao

There is offense in basketball you stupid fuck, and people argue it is the bigger impact wise. Same reason Fathead is trash. :lmao

[SAGirl]

Triggered.
Dabom is almost a worse troll and forum stalker than Tholdren with Timdunkem. tholdren doesn't descend to his levels of slur.

[dabom]

He didn't. Green was on his way to a possible fMVP while Tony was shooing in the low 40s. Sure, Parker passed better than Manu did, but of course, who didn't? Tony went for about 16 points on about 18 possessions.

Green was never winning FMVP. He is a role player. They were winning games because of Parker. Take out parker and the Spurs lose by more than losing danny. One is a role player, and the other an MVP Candidate. :lol

It was either Parker in game 6 or Duncan in game 7. :lol

[dabom]

Triggered.
Dabom is almost a worse troll and forum stalker than Tholdren with Timdunkem. tholdren doesn't descend to his levels of slur.

You are one of the worst posters on this site. :lmao

Always being wrong, just started watching basketball 3 years ago. :lol

You keep talking about defense and saying Patty is a bad player. :lmao

There is offense and defense. That's why fathead is a human victory cigar in the playoffs, while Patty is playing with the best players. :lmao

[SAGirl]

won't descend to that level. slur.

[dabom]

Tell me I'm wrong. :lmao

[Chinook]

Most teams don't have two great wing defenders to check Kawhi and Murray. The best will defend Kawhi. And DeJounte gets to hound the point guard on defense -- where, not only himself, but the the team has a huge edge when he's the man defending the PG. Go look up the defensive advance stats with him on/off the floor without Kawhi. He's becoming a monster on that end right before our eyes and no he wouldn't have that kind of impact chasing around and defending players bigger than him. As I said since last season the point guard position is where he has the highest ceiling, and no he would't have the same impact on D defending bigger players.

No one's arguing whether he'd perform better matched up with worse players. That's obvious. The question has always been about the rest of the roster/lineup. You know I have no interest in Murray becoming the starting two, so my horse isn't racing on that track. The question has always been about if Murray could play the two if the Spurs had a chance to get another PG. Originally, it was you claiming the team was going to let Mills walk to give DeJounte the ball, which of course didn't. It's looking like it should have happened, but we'll see.

I support getting the best five guys out there and not playing Murray at the one just because. It just so happens that Murray at the one IS part of the best five until further notice. But that may not be the case forever. Had Patty not fallen off, him and Murray as a guard combo would have looked a lot better than Murray and Simmons/BP.

[Chinook]

Green was never winning FMVP. He is a role player. They were winning games because of Parker. Take out parker and the Spurs lose by more than losing danny. One is a role player, and the other an MVP Candidate. :lol

It was either Parker in game 6 or Duncan in game 7. :lol

It's so strange hearing you irrationally defend Parker in that game. No one's giving fMVP to a guy who played like Tony did in that series. Tim had a definite chance, but only because Green paved the way for him.

[coachmac87]

Chinook running circles around Dabom in bball knowledge...

And yeah I know what you're already gonna say so try again...

[dabom]

It's so strange hearing you irrationally defend Parker in that game. No one's giving fMVP to a guy who played like Tony did in that series. Tim had a definite chance, but only because Green paved the way for him.

I've always loved Parker, just not in 2014 and on. I've said many time 2012/2013 MVParker was the engine. Every time he left the floor, the team got worse. He was the floor general. Parker was the number one defensive assignment for 2013, and maybe green gets a tougher game plan than previously for 2 games but not at the level that MVParker commanded. Not by a long shot. :lol

[dabom]

Chinook running circles around Dabom in bball knowledge...

And yeah I know what you're already gonna say so try again...

Chinook is actually always wrong around here. :lol

Even he will tell it. :lmao

Bad posters need to stick together. :lol

[SAGirl]

Chinook running circles around Dabom in bball knowledge...

And yeah I know what you're already gonna say so try again...
it's not difficult to run circles around him, dude is a bad troll.. he's just annoying as "fuck" and it gets tiresome... plus it's a waste of time.

[dabom]

People always hating cause I'm right. :lol

Should be appreciating the poster.

[Laughing Gravy]

Dabom = mental midget attention whore.

Fact

[coachmac87]

Chinook is actually always wrong around here. :lol

Even he will tell it. :lmao

Bad posters need to stick together. :lol


It's not about being right or wrong you insecure low life fuck....

He's bringing up solid points to which you can't counter because you don't know any better....

Nobody cares if you're a good poster or not bruh..not even your mother

[dabom]

Why is it the low tier posters always hating on me? :lol

The real posters know I'm legit.

[Calispursfan11]

Why is it the low tier posters always hating on me? :lol

The real posters know I'm legit.

This is true. You have been around a long time and posted some solid thoughts. They should respect you more.

[dabom]

This is true. You have been around a long time and posted some solid thoughts. They should respect you more.

Thanks brah. :tu

[SAGirl]

This is true. You have been around a long time and posted some solid thoughts. They should respect you more.
this was a funny joke Cali, props. :lol

[Calispursfan11]

I saw DM live in the preseason and he looked pretty darned good then, but he's improved noticeably in just a few weeks. As much as I like Tony, he is going to have a hard time keeping the starting spot if and when he returns. Also, I think Pop is gonna favor DM for the foreseeable future over Mills because he needs to play Manu and Mills together and he likes DM's length on defense. Those two things alone keep DM the starter.

[Chinook]

I've always loved Parker, just not in 2014 and on. I've said many time 2012/2013 MVParker was the engine. Every time he left the floor, the team got worse. He was the floor general. Parker was the number one defensive assignment for 2013, and maybe green gets a tougher game plan than previously for 2 games but not at the level that MVParker commanded. Not by a long shot. :lol

"I was always a fan of Parker, except for every season since I've joined." A likely story there.

[SAGirl]

I saw DM live in the preseason and he looked pretty darned good then, but he's improved noticeably in just a few weeks. As much as I like Tony, he is going to have a hard time keeping the starting spot if and when he returns. Also, I think Pop is gonna favor DM for the foreseeable future over Mills because he needs to play Manu and Mills together and he likes DM's length on defense. Those two things alone keep DM the starter.
solid thoughts.
the question for Pop is what happens to Patty when manu retire tbh? If tony can play he's probably a better backup if the bench will no longer be Manu's but that is a discussion for another time.

[dabom]

"I was always a fan of Parker, except for every season since I've joined." A likely story there.

I've said this many times on ST. It's not a one time thing. :lol

[Calispursfan11]

Thanks brah. :tu

No worries, man. People feel threatened when their expectations aren't met and there's a lot of uncertainty with the guard position since Tony's injury. Props for your takes in this time of speculation and uncertainty. It is a lot easier for the peanut gallery to chime in and criticize someone like you who has a difference of opinion and challenges the status quo than to put themselves out there for critics. Plus that would require them to formulate their own opinions. That's just too much for some people. Props to you.

[dabom]

No worries, man. People feel threatened when their expectations aren't met and there's a lot of uncertainty with the guard position since Tony's injury. Props for your takes in this time of speculation and uncertainty. It is a lot easier for the peanut gallery to chime in and criticize someone like you who has a difference of opinion and challenges the status quo than to put themselves out there for critics. Plus that would require them to formulate their own opinions. That's just too much for some people. Props to you.

The Peanut Gallery. :lol

[TD 21]

This.

I dont get why some want to move him to SG either. I elaborated on this topic last year.

Can't speak for others, but personally, it's not that I want that; it's just the reality. Parker and Mills aren't going anywhere and will be in the rotation, so until Parker retires, the only path to a permanent rotation spot for Murray, is to defend SG's or wings.

[DAF86]

Danny Green is the key to Murray having the advantages people want him to have. Danny has to be good enough to where you can't hide PGs on him. It doesn't matter if DeJounte "plays" PG or SG. He'll be guarded by wings if he keeps up the offensive production. And he should learn the two, because he won't be the functional one with Kawhi back anyway.

If Murray keeps this up, no matter how Green plays, opposing coaches will start putting wings on him regardless. But that doesn't matter, that only affects the offensive part of the game, on defense (and the boards) we would still be deadly with Murray as the PG there.

[DAF86]

Murray is not the creator of offense, and he's only been getting his buckets for three games, with sporadic results before. Teams don't adjust their gameplans that quickly for the regular season, which is why it took years for them to start prioritizing Green when he shots well and still years for them to stop doing it when his shot fell off.

If Murray keeps playing well, he'll see a wing in the playoffs, and all these folks bitching about him playing the two will see it doesn't really matter. But if Green can keep doing to PGs what he did to Lowry, teams will be forced to play Murray straight-up. That same trade-off has been the case since the semis in 2013.

You are focusing on only one side of the ball son.

[tonight...you]

Why is it the low tier posters always hating on me? :lol

The real posters know I'm legit.
#CharacterAssassination

Now that's some 'spec, brah.

[dabom]

#CharacterAssassination

Now that's some 'spec, brah.

:lol

[Chinook]

If Murray keeps this up, no matter how Green plays, opposing coaches will start putting wings on him regardless. But that doesn't matter, that only affects the offensive part of the game, on defense (and the boards) we would still be deadly with Murray as the PG there.


You are focusing on only one side of the ball son.

Whom Murray guards is not dependent on the guy next to him. He can still guard PGs if he plays the two, I didn't "focus" on it, because that's just obvious. Green's done his fair share of guarding PGs despite only playing a handful of minutes there. And his rebounding success is a function of his matchup, so him being guarded by twos would limit his offensive boards, whereas him guarding ones would help it, even if he plays the two.

You can say "b-b-but net rating". Of course, though, that's a function of how well the guy playing next to Murray is performing too. As I've said, I have no issue with Murray being the PG. If Parker and Mills get back to form along with Murray cooling off (which should happen as a net rating of 30 is unsustainable), then playing your best 10 means Murray plays the two. No reason to play a guy like Brandon Paul over Patty just so Murray can be at the point.

[TheDoctor]

Danny Green is the key to Murray having the advantages people want him to have. Danny has to be good enough to where you can't hide PGs on him. It doesn't matter if DeJounte "plays" PG or SG. He'll be guarded by wings if he keeps up the offensive production. And he should learn the two, because he won't be the functional one with Kawhi back anyway.
If DJ keeps this offensive output, once Kawhi is back he’s gonna be a nightmare for other teams. Something (lite) similar to what teams had to deal w/ Westbrook and Durant.

[DAF86]

Whom Murray guards is not dependent on the guy next to him. He can still guard PGs if he plays the two, I didn't "focus" on it, because that's just obvious. Green's done his fair share of guarding PGs despite only playing a handful of minutes there. And his rebounding success is a function of his matchup, so him being guarded by twos would limit his offensive boards, whereas him guarding ones would help it, even if he plays the two.

You can say "b-b-but net rating". Of course, though, that's a function of how well the guy playing next to Murray is performing too. As I've said, I have no issue with Murray being the PG. If Parker and Mills get back to form along with Murray cooling off (which should happen as a net rating of 30 is unsustainable), then playing your best 10 means Murray plays the two. No reason to play a guy like Brandon Paul over Patty just so Murray can be at the point.

But then you would have Mills and Tony guarding opposing Wings. Wasn't that obvious for you too? :lol

Even if Tony or Mills guard non-offensive threats like the Robersons of this world, opposing teams would still punish them on switches and offensive boards. Of course Murray's defensive rating depends on the guys he plays with, that's why all the smart people here don't want him playing alongside Tony or Mills. It really isn't that hard to understand, tbh.

[Chinook]

But then you would have Mills and Tony guarding opposing Wings. Wasn't that obvious for you too? :lol

This has never been that big of a deal. No one is going to break up their offense to specifically iso up and down the floor, unless their PG sucks and their wings are much better. If that's the case, who cares how good Murray would be at checking the PG if that PG wasn't going to be the main offensive threat anyway?


Even if Tony or Mills guard non-offensive threats like the Robersons of this world, opposing teams would still punish them on switches and offensive boards. Of course Murray's defensive rating depends on the guys he plays with, that's why all the smart people here don't want him playing alongside Tony or Mills. It really isn't that hard to understand, tbh.

They'll "punish" everyone on switches. Generalists only have advantage is chaotic situations. In a stable situation, the specialists reign supreme.

The point about the rating is that it makes sense for Murray to be a PG when the wings are better than the other guards. But if that changes, then Murray shouldn't play at PG just because of his individual net rating. That's stupid and selfish. Of course his stats will look the best if he's put in the best situation, but the team should hope that the guards improve to the point to where playing a guy like Paul over Mills or Parker doesn't make sense. 2014 Patty/Murray is a better back court than Murray/Paul. 2017 playoffs Parker/Green/Leonard -- 2014 Patty/Murray/Ginobili is far and away the best perimeter rotation the team can ask for. Of course, that's not going to happen. The debate has never been about if Murray should be playing PG given the current performance of the roster. It's been about if Murray should play PG no matter what.

[DAF86]

This has never been that big of a deal. No one is going to break up their offense to specifically iso up and down the floor, unless their PG sucks and their wings are much better. If that's the case, who cares how good Murray would be at checking the PG if that PG wasn't going to be the main offensive threat anyway?



They'll "punish" everyone on switches. Generalists only have advantage is chaotic situations. In a stable situation, the specialists reign supreme.

The point about the rating is that it makes sense for Murray to be a PG when the wings are better than the other guards. But if that changes, then Murray shouldn't play at PG just because of his individual net rating. That's stupid and selfish. Of course his stats will look the best if he's put in the best situation, but the team should hope that the guards improve to the point to where playing a guy like Paul over Mills or Parker doesn't make sense. 2014 Patty/Murray is a better back court than Murray/Paul. 2017 playoffs Parker/Green/Leonard -- 2014 Patty/Murray/Ginobili is far and away the best perimeter rotation the team can ask for. Of course, that's not going to happen. The debate has never been about if Murray should be playing PG given the current performance of the roster. It's been about if Murray should play PG no matter what.

Why are you bringing all these hypothetical scenarios? The rotation wings are Kawhi, Green, Manu and Anderson or Gay. All better options than moving any of the three PG's out of position. So no, the Spurs will never be better playing all three of Murray, Tony and Mills rotation minutes. One of the three has to stand on the side. It would be idiotic to have Murray be the one to be left out, so that leaves Tony and Mills to fight for a rotation spot.

[Chinook]

Why are you bringing all these hypothetical scenarios? The rotation wings are Kawhi, Green, Manu and Anderson or Gay. All better options than moving any of the three PG's out of position. So no, the Spurs will never be better playing all three of Murray, Tony and Mills rotation minutes. One of the three has to stand on the side. It would be idiotic to have Murray be the one to be left out, so that leaves Tony and Mills to fight for a rotation spot.

You listed five players for six positions. That leaves the final position open for one of the PGs. Whether the bench is Mills/Murray or Mills/Parker makes little difference.

Anyway, the reason for the "hypotheticals" is because the debate is about the philosophy of Murray playing the two in general, not the efficacy of him doing it right now. I've been extremely clear that I would like Murray to keep starting at the one provided he keeps playing well. I don't think he'll be as good, as his current performance is unsustainable, but that's whatever. He could easily remain the best option when all is said and done. But as the team looks to its future, the team will find itself in situations where Murray will be the bigger guard on the floor and the functional SG. It shouldn't be an issue.

You have folks saying White couldn't play next to Murray because they're both PGs, and that's ridiculous.

[MaNu4Tres]

Even if Murray regressed to becoming more inconsistent, he'd still be better than Mills & TP -- who have a positive impact once every 3 or 4 games. Murrays time has come.

[SAGirl]

Until we see how Tony looks I won't assume he's better than anybody tbh. Tony is so brittle right now, gets injured frequently with nags here or there and tries to play through them, having awful games b4 Pop realizes he's not shooting with his feet balanced bc he has some sore body part and decides to sit him. He gets injured in the season every year. The miles show in his lack of durability. At this point he should be on a Manu schedule, playing bench minutes, sometimes with the better lineups if he's playing well, and getting his minutes restricted and his body preserved. I hope Pop in his everlasting love for Tony thinks about what is best for his body too, and he will bc Pop is so careful with his old players. The fact Murray is playing awesome and is truly deserving makes this honestly very easy, almost a non-issue.

So, I don't know why Chinook is arguing for Tony this strongly and you know I like you Chinook. Even Brazil was saying Tony could play some more few years like he wants to if he comes off the bench. Tony was a borderline starter quality last season, at big chunks of the season he was one of the worst starting PG in the league, certainly looking to place in the lower 3rd tier of them. What makes one think he will be better than that level coming off this injury a season older? I can't see it. He will have to show me tbh. That's just me obviously. Meanwhile Murray is already showing me game.

I think Murray will keep minutes and his spot, with maybe mixing in Tony when Pop feels like he wants to test Tony out, give him reps for chemistry, or Dijon is having a rough night shooting for example and Pop wants to get someone else in. He's going to mix players in, but Murray is going to continue to play all season IMO.

[duncan2k5]

Even if Murray regressed to becoming more inconsistent, he'd still be better than Mills & TP -- who have a positive impact once every 3 or 4 games. Murrays time has come.

EXACTLY!!! Tony is too inconsistent to start and stunt Murray's growth... Besides Tony was horrible on defense, and will he worse... We simply aren't a better team with him starting...

[duncan2k5]

And Murray should play PG exclusively... Tony couldn't shoot for damn near ten years, and played point guard exclusively... He still doesn't have a pure jumper and stiff loses confidence and is reluctant to shoot at times

[Chinook]

I don't know why Chinook is arguing for Tony this strongly and you know I like you Chinook.

I feel like you've read nothing I've said on this topic if you think I've been arguing for Tony.

[SAGirl]

I feel like you've read nothing I've said on this topic if you think I've been arguing for Tony.
I have read way too much from way too many guys, I'll admit so memory can be fuzzy, and this isn't a direct reply, but a general impression. I seem to remember you mentioning Tony is still better than Dijon elsewhere, which I didn't care to reply to bc offensively he's probably a better shooter, and is just more experienced. Dijon's efficiency is based on opportunistic forays into the paint playing with bigs that have to be guarded away from the basket and who draw attention, and him getting aggressive with offensive rebounding/tip ins, as well as transition scoring. Tony is going to be better with his midrange shot and probably with 3 pt shooting as well until Dijon shows me different. But, Dijon is efficient right now with what he's doing and it's helping the team win, so I really don't care for the moment to even discuss it. There may be times in the future that becomes relevant, and maybe Dijon has indeed improved as a shooter, or he hasn't, but until we see the state Tony is playing at that is just completely speculative.

I have seen you discuss a lot of other aspects on which I commented but at the center of this, at least for me, is really whether he should continue to start or not. Him playing with the bench will just happen naturally as every starter does play with the bench at times, LMA, Kawhi, Danny, and Pau have all mixed in with the bench in different lineups so him playing with Mills or Forbes or Manu or whomever is just going to happen naturally.

[Chinook]

I have read way too much from way too many guys, I'll admit so memory can be fuzzy, and this isn't a direct reply, but a general impression. I seem to remember you mentioning Tony is still better than Dijon elsewhere, which I didn't care to reply to bc offensively he's probably a better shooter, and is just more experienced. Dijon's efficiency is based on opportunistic forays into the paint playing with bigs that have to be guarded away from the basket and who draw attention, and him getting aggressive with offensive rebounding/tip ins, as well as transition scoring. Tony is going to be better with his midrange shot and probably with 3 pt shooting as well until Dijon shows me different. But, Dijon is efficient right now with what he's doing and it's helping the team win, so I really don't care for the moment to even discuss it. There may be times in the future that becomes relevant, and maybe Dijon has indeed improved as a shooter, or he hasn't, but until we see the state Tony is playing at that is just completely speculative.

I have seen you discuss a lot of other aspects on which I commented but at the center of this, at least for me, is really whether he should continue to start or not. Him playing with the bench will just happen naturally as every starter does play with the bench at times, LMA, Kawhi, Danny, and Pau have all mixed in with the bench in different lineups so him playing with Mills or Forbes or Manu or whomever is just going to happen naturally.

I think maybe one or two people at the most are saying Tony SHOULD start. A number of folks think he will because of politics or rotation. I think Murray will fall off, but if he doesn't I don't want Tony starting. People underrate what Tony's done and what he can do, though. That much is true. Even bad Parker runs an offense better than Murray does, and as Kawhi gets back and Pop tries to fit everything together, having a steady hand to implement the game plan is definitely welcome.

Anyway, my horse is not about if Murray is a better option than Tony starting. It's about whether Murray can play the two if that's what needed to get the best 10 on the floor. I think he can and should if the team can get the other guards going. Until/unless that happens, it's obviously moot. But there are folks who think Murray/White is a bad pairing physically because both should play PG exclusively. That's how absurd the "Murray's a PG only" movement has become.

[SAGirl]

I think maybe one or two people at the most are saying Tony SHOULD start. A number of folks think he will because of politics or rotation. I think Murray will fall off, but if he doesn't I don't want Tony starting. People underrate what Tony's done and what he can do, though. That much is true. Even bad Parker runs an offense better than Murray does, and as Kawhi gets back and Pop tries to fit everything together, having a steady hand to implement the game plan is definitely welcome.

Anyway, my horse is not about if Murray is a better option than Tony starting. It's about whether Murray can play the two if that's what needed to get the best 10 on the floor. I think he can and should if the team can get the other guards going. Until/unless that happens, it's obviously moot. But there are folks who think Murray/White is a bad pairing physically because both should play PG exclusively. That's how absurd the "Murray's a PG only" movement has become.
We shall see what happens. As I said, I am not even going to worry about when Tony gets back, until Tony shows game and puts up a real challenge. If he's washed up, in minutes restrictions or brittle/injury prone all season then it's no contest.

He's going to be better as PG there is no question but Pop is going to play guys however he likes and slide them up and down positions however he likes... so I don't even worry about it. Kyle as a SG was probably one of his worst experiments that I hope to not see again, but you get my drift... it doesn't matter what we think Pop is going to experiment and mix guys up all season, from tiny lineups to huge/long lineups... In the playoffs I hope he will do what is right. When he wants to win in the 4th Q he stops the shenanigans. Murray can crossmatch defensively with a SG while playing next to a tiny SG like Patty for example... Patty/Murray I hope is not a Pop closing lineup unless there are injuries frankly.

[DAF86]

You listed five players for six positions. That leaves the final position open for one of the PGs. Whether the bench is Mills/Murray or Mills/Parker makes little difference.

Anyway, the reason for the "hypotheticals" is because the debate is about the philosophy of Murray playing the two in general, not the efficacy of him doing it right now. I've been extremely clear that I would like Murray to keep starting at the one provided he keeps playing well. I don't think he'll be as good, as his current performance is unsustainable, but that's whatever. He could easily remain the best option when all is said and done. But as the team looks to its future, the team will find itself in situations where Murray will be the bigger guard on the floor and the functional SG. It shouldn't be an issue.

You have folks saying White couldn't play next to Murray because they're both PGs, and that's ridiculous.

That would be true if Pop didn't play with two bigs together for most of the game. Anyway, if you need an extra wing, play Bertans in there, and I don't know why you say playing Mills or Tony out of position would be better than playing Paul. I liked what I saw from him the other day and his skillset (playmaking, three pt shooting, athleticism and defense), if it pans out, figures to be better than what Tony or Patty could provide out of position.