Reply With Quote
And Patty sucking. It has to be said...
No, the assumption on my part was not that Murray was going to "be this good going forward". That was literally your first point of contention a couple of posts ago. The very real possibility that he falls back down to Earth is why a) The starting job is not settled and b) Murray staying at PG isn't necessarily something the team has to prioritize. If DeJounte plays like he did in the Heat game (which was disappointing but not rock bottom), Tony would start no matter how bad he looked. Good passes or not, Murray just wasn't able to score and didn't make up for that on the defensive end. For a first time starter, that happens. Teams are adjusting to him, and it will get harder for him to play the same way he does now. I hope he'll be fine, but I expect him to struggle more frequently than his current ratio.
Whether the Spurs were going to beat GS is irrelevant. The point is that they didn't lose because the PG didn't score or defend well enough. They had issues like LMA being inconsistent or Dedmon sucking it up royally that were much more glaring reasons (besides the blazing sun of a reason that was Kawhi being hurt).
And Patty sucking. It has to be said...
You are very pessimistic if you don't think Murray can average around 8/10 ppg, 4 apg, 5 rpg and an above average defense. That's all it takes for Murray to deserve keeping his starting role.
A healthy Tony is not very useful against GS anyways. In fact, he might be the biggest liability on that matchup.
This... Ppl forget how trash Tony was last year... And even his much touted "great" playoff run had several HORRIBLE games in between... Including one where he literally had zero of everything... All this while playing consistently bad defense
KA did kick the out of the Cavs! He played well against OKC the year before, he had some key stretches guarding KD!!!
Kyle Anderson is an underrated player, and I am so happy to see him playing well this year.
I would choose Danny over him simply because you have Kawhi and LA on the floor and those two will have the ball on their hands a lot! And if not them, then Murray, who is the point guard, and of course Rudy Gay should have their touches as well. Danny can stay on the perimeter, Kyle needs to touch the ball to be effective offensively. But, if I was Pop I would definitely give minutes to DJ, KL, RG, KA, and LA!
Parker hasn't averaged fewer than 10 points in any season but his first. That's a guy you can assume to score at steady pace, not a first-year starter who can't shoot. I am not as inclined to believe Murray will assist at a high rate either once Kawhi comes back and takes the ball back. I'm not sure how Murray is going to work at all next to Kawhi, actually. The rebounding is nice, but it's an open question as to how much it actually helps for him to get boards. The Spurs are historically one of the best rounding teams in the league. Most of DeJounte's boards would likely go to other Spurs, the same way that Westbrook's triple-doubles often involved him getting rebounds his bigs let him have.
As far as D goes, I couldn't care less how well he guards lesser PGs. The team always has a great defense, so they'll be fine against 25 teams based on that alone. We'll have to see how he plays against the other four, starting with GS, though Kyrie will be a good challenge too. PG defense is by far the most irrelevant in the league, so even being a marked upgrade there doesn't hold a ton of weight if he clogs up spacing or otherwise takes a step back on O.
A healthy Tony would have done much better against Klay than Mills did. I'm hoping that no matter who starts that they play better than that. The team lacked the third/fourth option (along with their first) to put more pressure on the Warriors' D. Hopefully Gay fixes that. But Parker's 16 points on a 62 TS% was more than adequate.
Tony Parker couldn't shoot for almost ten years... And he still gets gun shy and inconcistent with his jumper... So saying saying Murray can't shoot, then bringing up Tony only scored less than ten points once is silly, tbh...
And pg defense is irrelevant? Lmao! The top teams every year have point guards that need to be stopped... If defense on them is irrelevant why do we put great defenders on them? Why doesn't pop let Tony or mills guard them? The problem with Tony is that you never know is he is gonna score 20 or 0 at this stage (as he did last year at times)... And you can't hide him vs the great teams because they post him up and score everytime, when he guards their SG (since he can't guard elite PG)... Point guard defense in this era is even more important than ever since point guards are even more dynamic and explosive than ever
Offensively Parker became an elite penetrator and finisher at the rim. Finisher to the point that some years he had the highest FG% at the rim even when bigs were included. That ability helped to severely bend the opponents defense. To date Murray is not an efficient, reliable rer at the basket, mid range or at distance and doesn’t bend the defense. He may get there but he has to prove it. His defense and rebounding are an asset though.
It's a lie to say Parker took 10 years to learn to shoot. He was already a better shooter than Murray at 21. He was a paint-oriented player for sure, but he was also a HoFer there. Murray doesn't have Parker's skill-set in the paint, despite the fact that he loves the floater so much. Tony has proven over the years that 10ppg is a safe bet for him. Murray hasn't. That's why it doesn't make sense to assume Murray being better is assured.
More importantly, who gives a flying what Tony could do 15 years ago? He can shoot better NOW, and that's what's relevant to the debate.
Yes. This might surprise you, given your posting history, but teams don't defend guys one-on-one very often. The PG being a good defender has the least impact on team defense out of any position. That's why Tony not being an elite defender has never stopped the Spurs from being a top team on that end. The same is true for Murray. PGs are skewed toward offense, so what he does on that end matters a lot more than his D. It's the opposite for centers, which is why scoring bigs like Oak and Jefferson fell out of favor.And pg defense is irrelevant?
Of course, this all ignores that Parker was a positive team defender for most of his career, even through 2014. , he had a bad regular season last year, but his post season D was serviceable.
Sigh... Where do I start? U do realize at 21 Parker was playing in the 2004 playoffs vs the Lakers where they forced him to shoot (which he wouldn't because he couldn't), thus causing us to lose 4 straight? He couldn't shoot for at 21...same as Murray... Same as kawhi... Murray has more upside than Parker at the same age, no question... And Parker can shoot better now, but so can mills... Does that mean we should start Patty mills? He shoots better than both...
And u still haven't answered my question... If guarding the point guard is irrelevant, why does Pop put elite defenders on them? Come on now... U sound silly... Dont try to justify ur statement and dig the hole deeper... If guarding them is irrelevant (your words)... We wouldn't be putting kawhi and Danny on the elite point guards, and hiding Parker on the SG (by whom he still gets abused, but at a lower rate)
It's not about PG defense son. It's about team defense as a whole. Murray helps that a lot more than Tony or Mills.
U are posting garbage and everyone knows it, but won't back me up because u are more popular on here... But everyone just read ur post and had the "wtf" face when you said guarding point guards is irrelevant, and having a point guard with good defense isn't important... Lmfao
Parker was pretty deadly with the midrange by the time he got his Finals MVP. Saying he couldn't shoot is not correct.
Probably by making a new thread?
That wouldn't change the fact that he could shoot better than Murray has been. Also, Kawhi was already an above-average shooting at 21. He was way better than Murray, even as a rookie.U do realize at 21 Parker was playing in the 2004 playoffs vs the Lakers where they forced him to shoot (which he wouldn't because he couldn't), thus causing us to lose 4 straight?
Parker does a lot of things better than Murray has so far, not just shoot. But you trying to compare rookie Parker to Murray in every thread like we have a choice between the two of them is lame.And Parker can shoot better now, but so can mills... Does that mean we should start Patty mills? He shoots better than both...
Again, this seems to be surprising you, but Pop doesn't switch bigger guys on PGs nearly as often as you think. Parker played a lot of minutes on elite PGs in his day. For a given possession, he'll put a bigger guy on him or as a change or pace. But Pop doesn't focus on the one-on-ones anymore. Messina's arrival has led to significantly more switching.And u still haven't answered my question... If guarding the point guard is irrelevant, why does Pop put elite defenders on them?
Moreover, PG defense is almost irrelevant because PGs don't affect D too much. That's not the same thing as guys guarding PGs. The bigger you are and the closer to the basket you are, the more you influence the other team. That's why Pau is leading the team in DRtg and is often graded out decently in DRPM despite having huge holes in his game. Defense-first PGs are almost worthless, which is why Weber can't hold a job and why Beverly signed for so little even after establishing himself.
Nah... He was just an ok midrange shooter then... Revisionist history... Sigh... As I stated on another thread... Nash and kawhi are deadly midrange shooters... Parker was always just an ok midrange shooter in his prime that occasionally got hot
Dude, don't be ceds 2.0. Please, just don't. We don't need that here. People don't like your posts because of you, not because I am too popular or whatever.
But the team doesn't seem to care who plays PG. It has elite D regardless.
Of course it matters who plays PG. If the guy who plays PG is an old midget, the team defense won't be as good as if the PG is an athletic 6'5'' guy with a 7 foot wingspan. Did you have brain damage or something? You have been arguing re ed dumb for like 3 days in a row now.
Because you haven't been right once. No one cares if the Spurs D goes from elite to "elite plus one". The Spurs easily have a championship-caliber D and don't need focus on getting defensive personnel. You also keep trying to push that Murray being huge means he's going to be superior defender. But that's not true. If it really mattered how big you were, guys like Paul and Beverly wouldn't be at the top of the field for their position. Murray's size gives him great potential, but that only goes so far.
Murray's going to have to keep working, getting better and most importantly, getting a large sample size for us to know how the positional battle is going to shake out. Miami was the first bad matchup for him, but starting on Monday, he's going to see more. He needs to nail those auditions or his DRtg will have no bearing on the positional battle.
Tell me one objective thing in which I have been proven wrong on this argument. There isn't one, because we aren't discussing objective things. We are arguing about hypothetical scenarios giving our opinions. So get the out of here with "rights" or "wrongs", tbh.
My opinion is that if Murray plays reasonable decent from here untill Parker returns (which I think he will), he should remain the starting PG of the team with Tony and Mills fighting for the backup spot.
My reasoning behind that opinion is that Murray needs to be given all the chances he can to become the best player he can be, like Tony was given on his rookie season.
Three things can happen:
1) Murray just doesn't pan out and the team starts to suffer his bad play. In which case he is sent back to the bench to avoid further damage and that's it. (very unlikely scenario, imho).
2) He stays all season long more or less playing as he is right now. In which case he should remain the starter, because at current form he isn't less than either Tony or Patty, so the team won't suffer.
3) Best case scenario: He breaks out and becomes (or starts to show flashes of) what many here think he could become.
I have a very strong belief that it will be either 2 or 3 and that's why I think he should keep starting. That's my opinion. Give yours and let's see how things unfold.
This isn't YOUR opinion. This is everyone's ing opinion. THIS is your opinion:
And mine is that I don't currently believe he will.(which I think he will)
We don't know how Murray's going to play, you creating a trendline based off four games was incorrect. The sample size was too small, and we hadn't been able to see if there was a pattern. You took three on/one off as a ratio, and I have argued repeatedly that I think the ratio will get worse. This is one aspect where your opinion was wrong-headed.
Then we had a completely different debate, which was whether a Murray who's lackluster on offense can make up for it with his ace or at least above-average defense. Ignoring that we had no idea if the DeJounte is even going to be a good defender, we disagree on how important PGs being able to defend is. Your argument was that he'd make the D better than it would be starting Parker. My argument was that such an increase would be pointless, because PGs' offense is much more important. Then D2K5 showed up and kinda pissed on the thread.
We've had other points of contention, but those two are what we've been talking about. It's intellectually dishonest to try to characterize your point the way you did. I've pretty much made the "If Murray plays well, he should keep the job" clarification into a signature in this thread.
You are talking about Murray's lackluster offense as if Tony was an offensive juggernaut. Tony had an OBPM of -1.2 last season, and he wasn't that much better the previous three seasons either. That's were our biggest differences of opinion seems to be. To you it seems like Murray would need to do something special to deserve keep the starting spot, when in reality all he needs to do is not suck as much as Parker has been sucking for the past 4 seasons, tbh.
Well, Murray right now is too raw offensively to be a starting PG if he cannot hit any jumpshot. Lack of offensive production from the guards spots has been an issue. Tony just doesn't bring it on the same level he used to and he's brittle, and being brittle means he sits games often with nags, and it also means he returns from those nags sometimes not looking too good. When Tony is healthy he looks like a whole different player and that player, a healthy Tony puts the Spurs on another level. It happened last season in the playoffs and it happened for a month or two in the regular season. I don't know how he will return from this injury, and I don't trust him to remain healthy. I am skeptical... alright?
So I was hopeful that Dijon, despite some flaws could hold the starting job and keep it. Tony and him could split the duties and games where Dijon can't hit the ocean you play him less minutes. If he's not ready and plays himself out of the spot or the rotation due to turning into a complete non shooter then he can't start for a playoff contender. Rajon Rondo, Ricky Rubio, etc. aren't PG in playoff teams and they are more experienced, some would say more talented... can streak to a jumpshot now and then too, have better court vision, real game manager skills, etc. Pop would not exchange Tony for any of those guards... so Dijon has an uphill battle until he can be more reliable offensively. He doesn't have to score in double figures nightly but nights with 0 shooting consecutively with baskets in garbage time are just unnaceptable for a starting PG.
heck the Magic seem to be doing great without Payton who has a lot of intagibles, better passing talent, experience, ability to finish at the rim etc... but cannot for the life of him shoot well.
Anyways, there is a lot of work for Dijon to still do. I like him a lot but he needs to be better.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions