Reply With Quote
Exactly. At least with Patty, there is some upside if he's hot. With Tony, the upside has diminished to maybe 8 points (on 3/8), 2 assists, 3 turnovers, and only getting beat off the dribble 8 times.you acting like tony can
but tony shot good against the nuggets and the wolves
Exactly. At least with Patty, there is some upside if he's hot. With Tony, the upside has diminished to maybe 8 points (on 3/8), 2 assists, 3 turnovers, and only getting beat off the dribble 8 times.you acting like tony can
Spurs are 4-3 when Fatty Grills starts.and one of those wins came against the Santa Cruz Warriors
FG% 3P% AST TO PPG tony as a starter .458 .338 4.6 1.4 9.9 patty as a starter .479 .442 6.0 0.9 13.6
Porker fluffers.
@mid
the "start tony" cliquePorker fluffers.
@mid
"pulls me back in"the "start tony" clique
It's incredible how stupid you are.
Not surprised, since you indeed wear a helmet to protect that mushy brain of yours.
Porker fluffers.
@midthe "start tony" clique"B-but Patty can't handle pressure""pulls me back in"
Besides the fact that opposing PG's are literally salivating when they see Patty guarding them. That 'ole' defense that Steve Nash won 2 MVP's with. We don't run D'Antoni's fun and gun system so Patty is a liability defensively every time he plays. He makes up for it with his accuracy and his hustle, but he will never be a starter under Pop.
Little General looking like Meadowlark again. He gunna lead us to the final four against Tar Heels. Oops I mean Wcf against Blazers lol.
Patty negative on defense, positive offense > Parker negative defense and offense. Parker can't create anymore. He's done!
Time to blow you up, again.[FONT="]The starting lineup with Porker. Meager net rating...
L.Aldridge, P.Gasol, D.Green, K.Leonard, T.Parker [/FONT][FONT="]7.3 Net Rating[FONT="]L.Aldridge, D.Dedmon, D.Green, K.Leonard, T.Parker [/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT="]8.4 Net Rating[FONT="]L.Aldridge, P.Gasol, D.Green, K.Leonard, P.Mills [/FONT][FONT="] [/FONT]
The lineup looks like its on steroids with Patty.
[/FONT][FONT="]23.3 Net Rating[/FONT][FONT="][FONT="]L.Aldridge, D.Dedmon, D.Green, K.Leonard, P.Mills [/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT="]14.3 Net Rating[/FONT][FONT="][/FONT][FONT="]http://stats.nba.com/lineups/advance...sort=MIN&dir=1
[/FONT][FONT="]
Shut it down. [/FONT][FONT="]
[/FONT]
Seriously, do you and your lover Gambit ever think anything through? So your cute start House fantasy comes true AND THEN WHAT? What do you with Parker? I've asked this question before and I get *crickets*.
"He can come off the bench for 15 minutes."
House against Houston this season: 24.5mpg, 8.5ppg, 40%FG, 4.75apg.
Against Golden State (with Curry): 20.5mpg, 8.5ppg, 38%FG, 2.5apg.
Against the Clippers: 21mpg, 7ppg, 32%FG, 2.3apg.
Against OKC: 21mpg, 7.6ppg, 41%FG, 1.0apg.
And this is primarily against those teams' backups
"I bet Porker doesn't do much better."
Parker plays the most of his minutes against the starters. But what you fail to comprehend is that even if House is, say, 20% better as the starting PG over a large sample size, Tony would probably be 100% worse off the bench. Let's look at some numbers.
2 man lineups (Tony plus one of the main bench players)
with Gasol: +7.8net
with Lee: +1.5net
with Manu: +5.8net
with Fathead: +0.6net
with Simmons: -1.1net
Avg net with all bench players: +2.92
Now Patty:
with Gasol: +9.3
with Lee: +15.7
with Manu: +12.3
with Fathead: +17.7
with Simmons: +15.9
Avg: +14.18
And most importantly, Patty's net ratings were achieved over a LARGE sample size, unlike his starting lineup net rating, achieved over 86 min and 47 min respectively. It's in' nothing. So why the do you want to remove a player who works obscenely well with ALL bench players to the tune of a 14.18net rating and replace him with a player that works with those same players about 11 points worse in net rating?
Here's even more simple math for you.
We KNOW Parker with the current starters is good enough for an average 8.4 net since we have a decent sample size. We KNOW House works at an average 14 net with the main bench players because we have a huge sample size. Thus, 8.4+14.18=22.58 net rating for the rotation overall.
Here's what your re ed plan looks like: House with the current starters (a 47 minute sample size
So if we employ the "start House" idea, we risk the Spurs rotation overall dropping over 5 net rating points. And there's is ZERO evidence to the contrary that it would "work."
Shut it in' down, indeed. Think next time you come at me. Goes for the other helmet, too.
Last edited by midnightpulp; 04-01-2017 at 11:30 PM.
Mid
Patty who?
Start Forbes
How many games will it take now for Tony to have a good game again, tbh? 10, 20?
Utah would get cucked 4-0. Probably the only team that doesn't have a guard who can take advantage of porker.
Microwave Grills krew (2 clowns)
Why do Uruguayans get so mad when TP has a good game?
Utah's defense is the kind that usually shuts down Parker. Long PG + shotblocker.Utah would get cucked 4-0. Probably the only team that doesn't have a guard who can take advantage of porker.
See, you're a player fan. You should be happy Tony is still capable of a 20 point game. Makes everything a whole lot easier.
Microwave Grills krew (2 clowns)
You keep saying this. You're the player-fan. You some how fail to realize porker isn't getting better but worse and your homer glasses wont allow it. I'm the purist here. I've seen it be the problem 3 years in a row. Will be fourth this year. And LOL if you think he was good in 2014.
No. I'm the realist. No other PG options on this team. No choice but to root for him AND Patty. Is what it is.You keep saying this. You're the player-fan. You some how fail to realize porker isn't getting better but worse and your homer glasses wont allow it. I'm the purist here. I've seen it be the problem 3 years in a row. Will be fourth this year. And LOL if you think he was good in 2014.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
