Reply With Quote
Aldridge has shared more minutes with other players and his numbers with those players aren't as high as with Patty.
Either way, this isn't about Mills. This is about Tony and how it would be better for the Spurs if he retires after this season.
Hoops regulating scrubs as per usual
Aldridge has shared more minutes with other players and his numbers with those players aren't as high as with Patty.
Either way, this isn't about Mills. This is about Tony and how it would be better for the Spurs if he retires after this season.
I don't need to look it up because I don't care but I think Aldridge's success on the court has very little do with Paddy Mills just like the Spurs being 97 points to the good with Forbes on the court doesn't carry much wieght either. It's more coincidence than anything else. Paddy just happens to be breathing in Aldridge's air space when he goes off.
The offensive unit of LMA, Gasol, Anderson, Green and Parker has an offensive rating of 120.5 and a defensive rating of 92.4 but that doesn't fit some dude's narrative about Paddy Mills so it's not mentioned.
As it pertains to Parker... Why would he even consider retirement when he knows he's playing for the one organization that pays old, over the hill players big money to NOT go away?
I wasn't talking from Paker's perspective (although it may be better for him to retire after this season instead of risking finishing his career as a 15th player), I was talking from the Spurs and Spurs' fans perspective.
tony’s VORP is -0.3so is forbes’. i’ve been saying neither should be on the court for a long time now.
So if the game didn't play out how it did, the end could have been different? You do realize that the Bucks could look at it the same way, right? Especially considering they were in far better position to win coming down the stretch. The Spurs were fortunate to even be in position to tie it, with their usual putrid road offense.
The lack of 3-point shooting in particular has become comical. They have to be dead last in makes and percentage this month.
No, I'm pointing out the exact opposite, that it's not about focusing on an unfortunate play or two, but the whole body of work throughout the game. If we're going to start pointing fingers at whose loss this was, looking at the guys that played considerable minutes but contributed nothing should be a good start, right?
The lack of 3-point shooting in particular has become comical. They have to be dead last in makes and percentage this month.
I know. What I'm saying is, you're only looking at it from the Spurs' perspective, in terms of what they could have done better. What about the Bucks? They were up 12, with 3-4 minutes left, against a team whose offense goes from bad to awful on the road.
By the way, Murray did play considerable minutes (29), including the entire 4th and played his usual role in running the offense into the ground. I don't expect polish at 21, but as a PG, if you can't shoot (he'll improve, but almost all big PG's remain sub par shooters even thereafter), you better be dynamic/explosive off the dribble and he's not that either. Right now, he looks like Carter-Williams 2.0 in the making, with a higher give a level.
Not a huge fan of Murray yet either, but if this is indeed a down season, makes sense to throw him out there, tbh... he definitely has more upside, right now, than Fathead or Forbes, who are also getting burn...
Bucks did well, but also they had very favorable whistle, if we're going to be honest. Not the reason they won and we lost, but playing at home, having sizeable leads, they let us twice back in the game. They made Pau looks pretty good, that right there is probably the biggest indictment. In all honesty, they're a one trick pony, and it'll be interesting to see how long the Bledsoe + Ante duo really lasts until egos get in the way, IMO.
Run the offense into the ground? He had the highest +/-... So if he ran the offense I to the ground, what did the other players do? We came back in the game with him playing... Wtf
The other players, in terms of running the offense, are pushing 41 and 36 and mileage wise even older. Save for the occasional turning back of the clock, they physically can't do it anymore.
Again, specifically regarding the offense, he was just along for the ride when "we" came back in the game. It was the Gasol-Aldridge hi-lo that was most responsible for bringing them back.
Murray scored like 6 points in the fourth while playing his usual great defense... What are u talking about? Smh... When Murray plays good, he is along for the ride... When he plays bad, it's because he sucks... However if he plays good and has a bad +/-, it is brought up... But when his +/- is good, it doesn't matter
The other players, in terms of running the offense, are pushing 41 and 36 and mileage wise even older. Save for the occasional turning back of the clock, they physically can't do it anymore.
Again, specifically regarding the offense, he was just along for the ride when "we" came back in the game. It was the Gasol-Aldridge hi-lo that was most responsible for bringing them back.
Murray generally scores in awkward, unsustainable ways. Like when Aldridge gets doubled, he'll be in the dunker spot, as if he's a rim-rolling center. Or after being disregarded in the weak side corner, he'll get it on swing-swing after they double Aldridge, fail to beat the defender (in this case, the corpse of Terry) off the dribble and instead shoot a contested mid ranger or spinning floater.
Even when those shots go in, as more have been recently, that's just not a winning formula. A point guard has to be able to either create, shoot or both. He provides neither. Guys on the fringe of the league, like Burke and Cook (though both will probably be on guaranteed contracts next season), are more talented offensively than the guy who is not only starting for this team, but who they appear poised to pin a lot of their future hopes on.
i guess murray never creates his own shots then...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
