Reply With Quote
I would rather we dump Parker to him tbh
Most of the recent history of the Spurs players taking paycuts to stay with the Spurs. Are you a ing idiot?
I would rather we dump Parker to him tbh
no doubt.
seems like pop would never do that though? maybe he if s another teammate's wife...
He's trash. Needs to gtfo along with the fat pos we have at pg now.
yep, more like Pop won't do it than Tony refusing to live in NYC in the tilight of his career..Parker is still a name, and i think he could still chuck his way to 15 PPG on non-contending team in the East..
Most of the recent history of the Spurs players taking paycuts to stay with the Spurs. Are you a ing idiot?
So you don't have anything to back up what you said?
Took you ten minutes for that?
Again, this is the Spurs Culture, got.
Years and years of multiple players taking paycuts to stay with the Spurs is more than enough. If you can see it, then you just a main stream vanilla poster.
Took you ten minutes for that?
Again, this is the Spurs Culture, got.
Years and years of multiple players taking paycuts to stay with the Spurs is more than enough. If you can see it, then you just a main stream vanilla poster.
So you've got nothing? I'll even accept an old SpursTalk post from back then, if you can find one that says Patty gave the Spurs a discount on top of the injury.
I already gave you more than enough proof, got. I probably got a post but I wouldn't know where to look. I got to go back to work. I could careless.
All I asked is for you to show something to back up your claim. If you can't do that, just say so.
A history of Spurs players taking paycuts. Like atleast 80% of the Spurs players have taken a paycut at a certain point or another. Patty ain't the type to talk about that because he is a high character person. THAT IN ITSELF IS PROOF, GOT.
You totally missed the point of what he said. Patty is an undersized SG, actually he's undersized even for a PG, that masquerades as PG. He isn't good at initiating offense or creating shots for his teammates, instead he's like Jason Terry in that he needs a good/great (passing) SG to run the offense.
In those same Olympic games where Patty was the main gunner for Australia; he never led the team in assists per game. He probably shouldn't ever start (consistently) in the NBA unless the team is lottery bound, the team is dealing with injuries or has an elite playmaking/defending (who does?) SG.
Last edited by J_Paco; 10-25-2016 at 12:37 PM.
In other words, he's a score-first point guard. How many of the starting point guards in the NBA right now are pure, pass-first point guards?
No, he's a shooting guard but is too small to play his actual position (ala Jerryd Bayless). Patty has very limited court-vision and is below average at creating good looks for teammates. He is great coming off screens and using screens to hoist a good look, though.
His defense is below average or poor because he is too small and no amount of effort he gives will ever change that. Players literally bully Patty inside or just shot right over him. Again, he does try much, much harder than most other PG's on defense.
He is best suited in a role similar to the one he has now in San Antonio, but anyone stupid enough to name him a starter would be looking to fail/lose.
(Note: Philadelphia is going to lose a whole bunch if they start Bayless once he returns from injury. Sergio Rodriguez js a obvious better choice and would be over Patty if that scenario came to pass.)
Patty is a pg dumbass. Semantics. Lol
Patty brings great stuff to the team. I hope he sticks around... his shooting/floor spacing will always be valuable
Imagine that Tony gets injured in the first game and is gone forever. Is your best judgment that Patty should move into the starting lineup for the season--and beyond via another contract?.
I don't think many folks would seriously consider and approve that scenario, despite what Patty brings to the table in shooting, energy, team spirit, etc. We all, or most of us at least, love him for those characteristics and skills. But A Vinnie Johnson (the Microwave) 6th man is more like his ceiling.
So, I just don't see him as a long term replacement at PG for Parker. And we really don't have anyone at present that we can guarantee is going to be a quality NBA PG for several seasons to come unless Murray makes an unbelievable jump in his skill set. The search for Parker's replacement must continue--but with more urgency.
Completely disappears. WTF kinda scenario is that. He either plays backup and we go from there.
i'd start patty over parker. to people saying patty's not a true pg... neither is parker.
parker gets most of his few assists from just driving and kicking the ball out. it's not like he's making great passes/plays out there, quite the contrary tbh.
parker's the problem. maybe pop won't bench him for the same reason he didn't keep manu in the starting line up. tony's an awkward fit starting or coming off the bench with manu.
Even if he was sufficient value, Mills wouldn't make sense for them anyway (or any team, in a starting role). Besides, they already signed Bayless, who's a similar player and between whichever of Noel or Okafor ultimately gets traded and another inevitable top 4 pick, they should be able to find a starting point guard.
There's good reasons (his potential market value and no longer having Ginobili to function as the point guard offensively) to think it would be prudent to move on from Mills, but the presence of Murray, Laprovitolla and Forbes isn't one. At this writing, not one is a proven NBA player, let alone a rotation one on an elite team and the latter isn't a point guard on either side of the ball.
My TD.
If Patty got traded for McLemore then Manu can run the offense & McLemore can get the tougher defensive assignment. (Kyle would be the backup 3)
Patty is going to get abused by Livingston/Rivers so dude is a lost cause against the two contenders, might as well move him for something rather than letting him walk at the end of the season b/c that's going to happen. (In all likeliness, PATFO are going to upgrade the PG position next summer w/ G.Hill being the primary target)
Not that that's necessarily a bad trade, but it would place even more of a creative burden on Ginobili and McLemore can't defend point guards.
Mills and Ginobill should cross match versus the Warriors, so Mills can be safely hid on Clark/McCaw. If Rivers persists as a problem, they could do the same versus the Clippers. Crawford is physically weaker and more of a jump shooter.
Agree that Hill will be a target.
Porker's going to run him off, tbh. Just like he's run off all his other backups who outplay him on the regular.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions