Reply With Quote
You...
Are a fckn clown.
Everyone sees what Parker is.
Your problem is making Patty into something he is NOT.
Manu with Patty can be a great bench combo and then if needed, to finish off games.
The Truth.
We use guards by committee.
Thats just the way it is. We need a PG. Especially for the playoffs. But our system is flexible now at guard. But it's by no means gonna scare GS nor most other playoff teams. KL, LMA, and finally PAu will have to be very good. Then we have to hope we can get serviceable guard play. With possible big scoring games from Patty, good passing by Manu and good leadership and ball handling when Parker needs to get KL and LMA going. Including knowing when to get out of the way. Or when to take the dare jumpers he is given.
You...
Are a fckn clown.
Everyone sees what Parker is.
Your problem is making Patty into something he is NOT.
I don't get mad when TP has a good game. I would give my left nut to have TP perform like this everygame because it would mean the Spurs could contend for real. I'm just countering the "pulls you back in" krew that acts like Parker is going to turn it around everytime he has one of these games once every 20 games, tbh.
Lmao you're getting confused with the re s that bump that Manu 20pt thread once every season....
What you don't get is that there is NO CHOICE but to be all in on Tony. That's the reality of the situation. I already crushed the myth that the offense (overall) would be better if House started. In addition to that, to beat Golden State it's going to take a all-hands-on-deck effort, meaning going 9-10 deep.
I just posted the stats saying opposite.
Yeah, you missed this:I just posted the stats saying opposite.
Time to blow you up, again.
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 playing 33 min per against Western Conference playoff team starting PGs.
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 ): 14.3 net. Parker with the main bench players: 2.9 net, = 17.2 net rating for that rotation overall.
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.
tl;dr Starting Patty risks a -5 net rating drop
It was cute how thought you "got me" though. Bet you celebrated with gambit last night over some tails and heavy petting.
I just posted the stats saying opposite.
The starting lineup with Porker. Meager net rating...
L.Aldridge, P.Gasol, D.Green, K.Leonard, T.Parker7.3 Net RatingL.Aldridge, D.Dedmon, D.Green, K.Leonard, T.Parker
8.4 Net RatingL.Aldridge, P.Gasol, D.Green, K.Leonard, P.Mills
The lineup looks like its on steroids with Patty.
23.3 Net RatingL.Aldridge, D.Dedmon, D.Green, K.Leonard, P.Mills
14.3 Net Ratinghttp://stats.nba.com/lineups/advance...sort=MIN&dir=1
Shut it down.
I just posted stats ting on those stats. Mine also have something called large sample sizes.
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 ): 14.3 net. Parker with the main bench players: 2.9 net, = 17.2 net rating for that rotation overall.
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."
Parker's had 15 games where he's scored 15+ points on .500 or better shooting. Every 20 games would be like 4 a season.
But when you posted Patty lineups with a smaller sample size you had no problem. This is why you stay being a cuck. Your arguments/position changes when you get owned every ing time.
I've never been on the "Start Patty" krew. It just makes more sense to have him coming off the bench.
However I've been, for quite a while now, on the "Tony Parker is done" krew. It's re ed to expect Tony to somehow turn it around and provide a production that he hasn't been able to provide for 2 or 3 full years now. He's done, he's not turning it around, expecting him to do so is re ed. Plain and simple.
It will obviously not happen but I seriously don't see how starting Murray over Tony would make this team any worse. What can Tony provide, at this point, that Murray can't? Slashing, shooting, defense? I guess the only thing I can come up with is the steady hand and experience to set the offense, but that's overrated as and not worth denying the chance to see a potential Murray break out, imho.
But whatever, I've already made peace with the idea that we are going to war as currently constructed, so it is what it is. I just hope that we adress the PG situation for the next season, because we won't be true contenders untill we fix that major flaw.
Yeah, dip , because the last time I posted Patty lineups was probably way earlier in the seasonBut when you posted Patty lineups with a smaller sample size you had no problem. This is why you stay being a cuck. Your arguments/position changes when you get owned every ing time.
Do you always enjoy being a stupid ?
Fact: Patty +14 with bench players over large sample size.
Fact: Tony +8 with starters over large sample size.
Yeah, Let's change a +22 net rating rotation proven to work over a season on a whim so you can see your mancrush start.
207 D'Angelo Russell, PG LAL 60 28.5 1.00 -1.99 -0.99 2.30 208 Dante Cunningham, PF NO 60 25.5 -0.95 -0.05 -1.00 1.99 209 Joel Anthony, C SA 16 5.4 -2.28 1.27 -1.01 0.12 210 Marshall Plumlee, C NY 16 6.4 -2.06 1.05 -1.01 0.14 211 Jonas Jerebko, PF BOS 72 16.1 -1.27 0.25 -1.02 1.51 212 Omer Asik, C NO 31 15.5 -2.89 1.86 -1.03 0.65 213 Tomas Satoransky, SG WSH 53 12.2 -1.90 0.87 -1.03 0.83 214 Luis Scola, PF BKN 36 12.8 -0.80 -0.29 -1.09 0.62 215 Anderson Varejao, C GS 14 6.6 -1.74 0.65 -1.09 0.10 216 Joakim Noah, C NY 46 22.1 -2.19 1.10 -1.09 1.30 217 Brandan Wright, PF MEM 22 15.1 -0.92 -0.22 -1.14 0.34 218 Josh Huestis, SF OKC 1 7.0 -1.95 0.81 -1.14 0.01 219 Brice Johnson, F LAC 2 3.5 -2.25 1.11 -1.14 0.01 220 Norman Powell, SG TOR 72 18.1 -0.34 -0.81 -1.15 1.60 221 Beno Udrih, PG DET 36 13.9 -0.97 -0.21 -1.18 0.56 222 Langston Galloway, SG NO/SAC 69 19.5 0.29 -1.47 -1.18 1.55 223 Rakeem Christmas, PF IND 25 8.7 -1.99 0.81 -1.18 0.24 224 Jordan Hill, PF MIN 6 6.8 -2.21 1.01 -1.20 0.05 225 Shabazz Napier, PG POR 49 8.9 -0.77 -0.43 -1.20 0.51 226 Tony Parker, PG SA 57 25.4 -0.76 -0.46 -1.22 1.64
Getting a little better from the beginning of the year.
I wanted Murray fast-tracked as an insurance policy. Didn't happen. So it's Tony or bust (although if he sucks in the playoffs, Pop better gamble on Murray or even Forbes).
Nice.
So you agree it was a small sample size and you still used them. got.Yeah, dip , because the last time I posted Patty lineups was probably way earlier in the season
Do you always enjoy being a stupid ?
Fact: Patty +14 with bench players over large sample size.
Fact: Tony +8 with starters over large sample size.
Yeah, Let's change a +22 net rating rotation proven to work over a season on a whim so you can see your mancrush start.
Because there was no other sample sizes at that time, helmet. The else are we supposed to use?So you agree it was a small sample size and you still used them. got.
Now we know. House is best off the bench. Deal with it.
Can we just end this joke of thought that Patty can be a starting level PG on a contending team?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
