FWIW, there's no case there either. I blew up that helmet crew myth the other day. Patty is so good with the bench, that starting him would be a crime. Some reading:
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.
Reply With Quote
but but Parker took a shot, must be a hero baller
Tony, I'm going to give the better players more time so you'll have to sit on the bench more.
