Just curious..
Printable View
Just curious..
It's not good tbh
Mills has been fine..
its the fact that with Parker out, the spurs is forced to play some dude who barely looks like he belong in the NBA D-league.
You talking about the Playoffs? :lmao
Pretty good.
2014 OKC. :lol
Same as it would be if he played tbhQuote:
Originally Posted by 313
Spurs fans are at a loss when they don't have Parker to blame
How about game 7 finals when he shit the bed and missed every shot until the pressure was off then had a nice stat padQuote:
Originally Posted by dabom
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Kawhi m8
Spurs CLEARLY missing the head of the snake. Aren't even a .500 team without him.
What the fuck do these armchair GM's know tbh
Parker has regressed considerably but the drop off defensively to Mills is noticable and the overall drop off to Nico is huge.
http://stats.nba.com/league/lineups/...mID=1610612759Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawhi m8
Our two best line ups feature a certain PG
This... really need to move on from him if Murray grows at all this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by apalisoc_9
:lmao the idiots on this boardQuote:
Originally Posted by cjw
I didn't say Murray is playing tomorrow. Or in three months. But Nico obviously doesn't belong on an NBA roster and is a placeholder until Murray is ready.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splits
I'd rather go no PG and watch Simmons get torched than Nico get torched.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/...38_468x298.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by 313
Murray is a couple years away from being 3rd string caliber.
Whatever they paid Parker, it wasn't fucking enough tbh :lol
So he's a a year away from being a year away?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan89
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by raybies
Parker is struggling and all but he is 10 times better than lapro dude... Patty is doing fine but we need two PGs in a rotation, with Parker out we have one.
Also a dude that is struggling without him is Aldridge tbh, Parker just spoon feed him on offense pretty much all the time
We need paler back, but I think Patty should play more minutes.
Lottery-bound. Now maybe people can start to understand why Parker is the winningest player in NBA history (minimum 1,000 games).
The team is - 8/ per 100 possessions offensively and +20/ per 100 possessions defensively with Parker on the floor.
Parker is 13th on the team in BPM at a net negative - 4.7 ( Terrible).
Parker has a PER of 5.16
He's avg. 5.5 points on 33% shooting.
You can't get much worse than that.
People have no idea how much easier the "simple" things are in a very difficult position. Patty doing fine is not good enough because he needs to play what he does best. KL wasting his time setting up the offense is not good enough. The opposition cannot play right on top of an Parker, even when he is injured. Parker is given some space at least. He is not crowded into the fetal position.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazil
Parker will supply the necessary ball handling to get to the playoffs. Then we hope for a rash of injuries and misfortunes of opponents. Get Green and KL together on the wings with Parker at the point and we might get a stop on occasion. At the end of the game play whoever has been performering (given that matchup) at point.
Even with the Spurs, pg is a very difficult position night after night, especially once the opposition learn they can play up in your nostrils. This is the NBA, very few people, even with great athletic ability, just walk on the court and become point night after night without eventually getting exposed. Krew don't get it. Never have.
Yes you can.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
You can lose games... When you have players that hide and get no stats when put in a difficult position.
You can lose Many games when you don't have a pg.
The first stat you go to is W//L.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgardn
When Parker actually plays or puts minutes on the court, Spurs are -8 offensively/ per 100 possessions and +20 defensively/ per 100 possessions. Do you know what that means?
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
I found it funny people thought he was the biggest reason for our struggles.
Green returning paid immediate dividends, and I truly think once TP returns he'll benefit from Green's return on both ends.
Love these posters who ignore facts and hold on to any ounce of belief they can ( delusional or not).Quote:
Originally Posted by bklynspursfan
Apparently it means that you win more games. Something PATFO, the rest of the league, NBA analysts, actual Spurs fans, and everyone except for the Krew understands.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
they are 7 new players hello
also tp has to adjust to the 7 new players and everyone with them
the head of the snake is missing and it makes leonard and others do more
Leave it one of the village idiots to explain..Quote:
Originally Posted by SASdynasty!
I respect your opinions and posts bro, I just think the stats you are using are too small of a sample size. The guy has played 4 games. No one can draw any real conclusions of any kind from a player after 4 games.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
Wasn't the post about the Spurs being 3-0 when Parker suits up?Quote:
Originally Posted by bklynspursfan
I'm using facts in that sample size to prove he's been detrimental when he plays, even if they win despite that being the reality.
Yea, I just know I've seen you use those stats in other places too on here. So yea, it'd be foolish to think TP is the sole reason they won those games, but it's also foolish to think he is the reason for them losing.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
Him being detrimental while he's in is still too soon to really say. He was playing with Anderson next to him and I think Simmons once. It's just too early to look at some of these stats IMO.
I am not a denier of facts/science or even stats BUT stats rarely tell the whole story. There were many games back in the day when going by +/- Matt Bonner was the best Spur in a game when anyone with a drop of sense knows that that is patently impossible. The eye test can be subjective but stats can be just as misleading at times. Per real plus minus on ESPN last year Nikola Jokic and Kevin Love were among the top 10 players in the league last year. I refuse to believe that's the case no matter what the stats say. Stats alone would have you believe that Ricky Rubio is a Gary Payton "the glove" level defender at PG, I have a hard time believing that one too. Parker's value to me is this are the Spurs better or worse with a healthy Parker in the game. Trolling threads would say worse with him in, but from what I am seeing right now every bit of continuity the Spurs can muster would be greatly appreciated while trying to integrate so many new players.
For real. Quit explaining shit faggot. You're embarrassing yourselfQuote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
Have you watched our recent games?Quote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
Who do you like at point?
Do you have stats on the actual amount of time a player has ball in hand per turnover? Do you?
There is a reason Danny Green, for instance, does not handle the ball for more than a second on a possession. You don't get it.
As poorly as Parker has played the past few seasons, he's still certainly a better option than the backup PG the Spurs have been playing during his absence, tbh..
Parker's production could be replaced by any competent NBA-level backup PG, but the Spurs don't currently have an alternative that qualifies(Lapro hasn't shown that he's an NBA-caliber player, yet)..
:wakeup
5-1 with Parker
1-2 without
Yeah...That's the reason for why LMA's struggling...Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazil
Parker played tonight and LMA was still poor offensively.
We ain't a lottery team anymore!
Head of the snake :worthy:
Do folks seriously think the last couple of losses had anything to do with Parker's absence? :lol
I don't know, you said Argentina was struggling because Missi retired. Then they lost 0-3 to BrazilQuote:
Originally Posted by DAF86
Losing to Brazil in Brazil is expected, tbh. Specially with a coach that should be retired.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGreatYacht
No shame in losing to the second best player in the world (only behind Ronaldo), tbhQuote:
Originally Posted by DAF86
It's no coincidence we got the win with MVParker playing through injury for the Veterans.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGreatYacht
TP9
https://65.media.tumblr.com/5e0c3b94...sdve4r_500.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Another game another win
Any top 50 guard would have provided the same shit. Its really mpre so that Green is playing now. And the fact that Laprivitolla plays when Porker is out.
Argentina was all round bad in that game.. change of guards bro.. time of Messi is over..Quote:
Originally Posted by DAF86
Argentina was bad but it wasn't because of Messi. Messi is still clearly the best player in the World son. :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by gilmor
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by DAF86
we were winning without Green, can't say the same without Parker. He's the head of the snake after all.Quote:
Originally Posted by apalisoc_9
Quote:
Originally Posted by 313
Another shitty game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazil
'but but Parker makes him better' :cry :cry
5-13 tonight
These Parker fans...:lmao
Still better than 3-13 against the Clippers & 5-18 against the PistonsQuote:
Originally Posted by YGWHI
Do the math, stupid troll.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGreatYacht
5-13 against Kings
4-13 against Pels
5-15 against Rockets
6-14 against Pistons
5-13 against Rockets
5 shitty shooting games vs only 2 is still better??
:lmao
'but Parker makes him better' :cry :cry
:lmao
2-0 against Houston WITH Parker
0-1 against Houston WITHOUT Parker
special needs.Quote:
Originally Posted by ducks
this thread :lol
spurs with parker: 17-4... but don't give him too much credit for victories, he shot 0 for 6 in two of them and had 1 assist in two of them as well
spurs without parker: 7-2... the two losses were against a fully healthy clipper team and the rockets (a game which we lost by 2)
if parker sat out the next two games and the spurs win, then our record without parker would be better than our record with him.
Truth bomb.Quote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
what's really funny is that parker fans are kawhi haters... and they want to chalk up our record to tony when it's kawhi who's been doing the heavy lifting.
Bump just because Spurs record with Parker is pretty damn impressive
our record without parker was so important that parker fans had to make a thread about it?
spurs winning % with parker: 77.42
spurs winning % without parker: 77.78
spurs winning % with patty: 79.49
spurs winning % without patty: 77.5
without parker the spurs are .818Quote:
Originally Posted by 313
with parker the spurs are .781
is there a point you were trying to make OP?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGreatYacht
:lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by Nathan89
He was bad but now I very excited about his potential.Quote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
Patty was fucking awful tonight. thank god for murrayQuote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
^ elite posterQuote:
Originally Posted by 313
Spurs got blown out in Cleveland last season with Porker. Just saying.
:wowQuote:
Originally Posted by FkLA
Mills was 2-6 for 4 points and 2 assists in 21 minutes in that game. Much worse than Parker, just sayingQuote:
Originally Posted by FkLA
Another truth bomb.Quote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
Without Parker steady hand running the offense the Spurs turnovered their way to an OT and nearly lost it in regulation, tbh.
I can live with that. Much better than dribble, dribble, dribble Parker's taking 14 shots this game whether he's hot or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoops Czar
There is truth that Parker can be a steadying influence at times. But he has a propensity to try and do much more than he ought to. Mills is the better option. Pop is kowtowing to Parker at this point, tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by spursistan
deflecting much? read the title of the thread you made.Quote:
Originally Posted by 313
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
the bravery in predicting an 30+ year old guard would steadily suck is frankly amazing and i'm glad some posters make this there sole duty. This forum would literally be dead without this content.
with parker the spurs are .781
without parker the spurs are .857
Quote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
Without Parker's steady hand the Spurs had only 8 TO's tonight, some of them coming in garbage time.Quote:
Originally Posted by spursistan
Cue in the Turnobili comment.
:stirpot::stirpot:What is the record without khawi? :stirpot:
Not good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manudona
spurs winning % without parker is better than golden state's :lol
:wowQuote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
:lobt2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
:wowQuote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
Quote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
I love backfire threads. My favorite. :lol
:corn:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dabom
the spurs road record is now 7-0 in games parker missed...
The real question is what is the Spur's record without Pau? They are undefeated.
with parker the spurs are .735
without parker the spurs are .833
Quote:
Originally Posted by gambit1990
parker fans avoiding this thread like the plague.
spurs are 3-3 over tony's last 6 starts.