Patty "Pressured" Mills with the 9 assist and ZERO turnovers

**GSH** · 03-14-2017

Not trying to be an anti-Porker here but when he was around Spurs used to won almost every game by a 2 point margin and now they win with almost 10 points leads.

It helps when the Spurs shoot 47% from 3P, instead of the 22% and 25% they shot in those two OT games. If any of that is on Parker, it's not much. The Spurs just shot like from downtown. I don't remember every shot from every one of those close games. But I remember enough times that the Spurs got wide open shots and bricked them. A PG can get the team wide open shots, but they have to make them. Oh, and the Spurs shot FT's like quite a few times in there, didn't they?

I'm not defending, or saying that Parker is wonderful. Just that you can't make that conclusion from the margins of victory.

**Budkin** · 03-14-2017

Start Paddy Krew

**SpursIndonesia** · 03-14-2017

Patty is great in his role for this championship aspiring team, which is being an undersized shooting guard off the bench, no more no less.

**ElNono** · 03-14-2017

I don't get why certain Spursfans have to bring down Paddy to prop up Enrique, tbh... Paddy had a solid game, Tony didn't play, we won... it's all good...

**Mikeanaro** · 03-14-2017

Originally Posted by Hoops Czar

I'm not trying to be an anti Kawhi but, the Spurs are 6-1 without him, winning by a margin of 12.6 ppg. It seems like the team struggles to win by 8 points when he plays.

Paddy had an outstanding game by his standards but he still ended up with a zero +/-.

Well the 6-1 stat is real, sometimes fans see certain star making 30 points but they cant see there is always a cost, but in Spurs case the bench is great so they can win games and make Kiwi look bad which is something other teams cant afford, now in the long run dont having Kiwi would be a negative Im pretty sure.

**Mikeanaro** · 03-14-2017

Originally Posted by GSH

It helps when the Spurs shoot 47% from 3P, instead of the 22% and 25% they shot in those two OT games. If any of that is on Parker, it's not much. The Spurs just shot like from downtown. I don't remember every shot from every one of those close games. But I remember enough times that the Spurs got wide open shots and bricked them. A PG can get the team wide open shots, but they have to make them. Oh, and the Spurs shot FT's like quite a few times in there, didn't they?

I'm not defending, or saying that Parker is wonderful. Just that you can't make that conclusion from the margins of victory.

To me Spurs benefit from TP absence by moving more the ball, the dribble dribble kills the pace and now players have more chances to contribute, while is cool to make 3´s they wont always go on so our guys got to figure out other plays, too bad this Murray kid is injured would love to see him in these TP-less squad.

**DAF86** · 03-14-2017

Originally Posted by GSH

Since some halfwit decided to start a whole thread about an argument from the game thread, I'll post a link (but not my whole post).

Bottom line, Bud did make an adjustment and got Schroeder to pressure Patty in the backcourt some of the time. Patty handled it fine, but there's no doubt that Bud thought that pressuring Patty might be disruptive. Atlanta didn't pressure anyone else in the backcourt, but they didn't pressure Patty all that much.

The argument started because someone said Kawhi was bringing the ball up the court half the time, which was a ridiculous exaggeration. Beyond ridiculous.

Bottom line, the argument was about that almost never happened at all (I counted.) Making a whole thread about it was ing moronic.

Dude, why are you making such a big deal of my "Not a fan of Kawhi bringing the ball up every other possession" coment?

It was a comment not meant to be taken literally, it was just a game thread comment to express my concern with a situation that was happening during a specific comment (the middle of the 3rd quarter), I didn't mean to say Kawhi was bringing the ball up exactly half the time, nor that it happened during the whole game. I even explained this on the game thread.

escalated just because of DPG21920 chipping in to push his agenda, tbh.

If anything, he was the one pretending like Kawhi bringing the ball up the court during the whole game was a common occurrence, tbh.

**DPG21920** · 03-14-2017

Except even after watching the film, what I said happened happened

agenda.

**DAF86** · 03-14-2017

Originally Posted by DPG21920

Except even after watching the film, what I said happened happened

agenda.

You said:

Originally Posted by DPG21920

That's because they respect Kawhi. If it were Mills there would be pressure from Dennis guaranteed

Originally Posted by GSH

Atlanta didn't pressure Mills all that much

"If it were Mills there would be pressure from Dennis GUARANTEED"

I never tried to claim Kawhi was bringing the ball up half the time for the entirety of the game like GSH seems to think I intended. I was just commenting on that particular stretch in the 3rd quarter, where Patty wasn't even on. So if anything, Kawhi bringing the ball up was Pop not trusting Forbes, rather than Patty, tbh.

All this was created by you seizing an opportunity to push your "Patty can't dribble" agenda, tbh.

**DPG21920** · 03-14-2017

Ugh he said Patty was pressured.

**DAF86** · 03-14-2017

Originally Posted by DPG21920

Ugh he said Patty was pressured.

An unlike you who pretend to act like Patty was going to get pressured most of the time GUARANTEED (

) he said "Patty didn't get pressured all that much".

To tell you the truth, I don't recall Patty being pressured at all except for that one infamous play. I would like to see a clip of the plays GSH considers Patty to have been "pressured"; but anyway, the fact of the matter is that if Patty did get pressured, it was just in a few couple of plays, not much more than that, and Kawhi didn't bring the ball up all that much either, and when he did it it was mostly when Patty wasn't even on the court. So your whole "Kawhi brings the ball up because Patty can't handle the pressure" argument doesn't hold a lot of ground, tbh.