Woj:Patty Mills has agreed to a 4-year, $50M deal to stay with San Antonio

[Chinook]

Mills has certainly been a disappointment, but there are two things to consider:

First is that the team is going to need Patty to play at a high level to reach its ceiling. It's the same thing with Parker, Green, Gay and Pau. They don't have a chance against the Warriors without their back court getting points, and out of the guards the team has Patty and Bryn are the only ones who have the potential to punch above their weight for a long stretch. Green can have a couple of great two-way games in a series, and Tony/Manu can turn the clock back for a bit. But only Patty is there to get points primarily, and he used to be really good at it. The team more needs him to play well than needs him gone, especially this year. Trading him and giving a permanent spot to Murray/Forbes isn't going to raise the team's ceiling this year.

Second is that when looking at opportunity cost, it is unhelpful to compare APYs. The team getting a better alternative than Patty would have involved going under the cap, which would have meant significantly more roster turnover. In a perfect world, both Mills and Gasol would have better deals. But this is likely the best roster the team could get personnel-wise outside of some minor moves (drafting Bell or bringing over Milutinov). Only substantial way would have involved finding positive trades for Parker and maybe Pau and Green.

[Raven]

deal looks awful at this point.. he needs to step up.

[SAGirl]

Patty isn’t able to guard anyone in the warriors. If he were to have been paid for that matchup it was a mistake. He’s been pretty awful against them in recent memory. He’s got no size and will rush up bad shots while getting blown by or posted up by Livingston on the other end. He started this season picking up right where he left off in the warriors series: sucking. He hasn’t been able to light up the warriors in a long time that I can recall.

He was paid for det leadership and culture. It’s very clear that's what he said. I never liked this signing either. I only stopped whining about it bc Pop made a big investment of 4 years of him and 4 years is a long time to be hating a core member of the team. It was wearing me out to be complaining about it all the time so I just moved on past it, but I never liked the signing either and it even surprised me how expensive his contract was and the years guaranteed to him.

He’s going to have to show up big time in the playoffs but then again he said “no pressure” so ???

[MaNu4Tres]

Mills has certainly been a disappointment, but there are two things to consider:

First is that the team is going to need Patty to play at a high level to reach its ceiling. It's the same thing with Parker, Green, Gay and Pau. They don't have a chance against the Warriors without their back court getting points, and out of the guards the team has Patty and Bryn are the only ones who have the potential to punch above their weight for a long stretch. Green can have a couple of great two-way games in a series, and Tony/Manu can turn the clock back for a bit. But only Patty is there to get points primarily, and he used to be really good at it. The team more needs him to play well than needs him gone, especially this year. Trading him and giving a permanent spot to Murray/Forbes isn't going to raise the team's ceiling this year.

You're not looking at the overall picture.

Mills is a net negative against the Warriors even when his shot is on. Why is this? Because of how they exploit him routinely on the defensive end. The other 4 on defense have work harder by helping him with doubles whenever the Warriors or other smart/great teams target him. If they are not sending doubles, they are aware of the situation going on and they tend to play a step closer to the strong side action Mills is a part of -- which can leave wider/easier passing lanes for wide open 3's/layups. Spurs have to move more to recover on defense when they exploit Mills. This contributes to fatigue quicker, which in turn, can hurt the Spurs offense.

How can this hurt the offense? 1) More energy expended on defense as a whole, leads to more fatigue and inefficiency on offense -- how much exactly? I'm not sure and its hard to quantify, but its common sense if you've played basketball before. 2) With Patty on the floor against the best teams that optimize their O by exploiting the Spurs' Parker/Patty weakness, the Spurs' offense will face a set defense more often than not, because the opposition gets to optimize their offense -- which means more taking the ball out of the basket -- which means more facing a set defense for the Spurs. The best defense leads to easy offense. Bad defense leads to dependency on great half court offense ( which Spurs don't have).

For the upcoming rebuttal, " well defense isn't the problem for the Spurs, they have the 2nd best defensive rating". Yes, the Spurs have graded out as a top defense overall in the NBA -- but those stats are fools gold to a degree because they're blended in against a lot of poor teams that just play. These poor teams don't optimize every possession on either end of the floor like the great teams do when it matters most. So while this stat is great to see, I still take it with a grain of salt because I understand the context behind it and all the bad teams that simply don't pay attention to the simple details like the Spurs do consistently. Spurs attack weaknesses on both ends, 90% of other teams do not. That is what makes them so damn consistent.

At the end of the day, if Spurs traded Mills and promoted Murray and Forbes, that would give this team a better chance against the Warriors because they are not defensive liabilities ( if Forbes is implemented as the smallest guy on the court and not used at the wing). You can not have a defensive liability on the perimeter against the Warriors who has inferior size, if you do -- Warriors will attack it relentlessly and it will slowly eat away at the Spurs' overall game. Optimize the defense, where Spurs don't have to utilize doubles, where the Spurs don't have to constantly rotate over when Mills' guy gets at the rim. Optimize stops, optimize transition opportunities -- easy points and optimize the touches for Kawhi, LA, Gay, Manu and Kyle on offense. That recipe will give the Spurs the best chance against the Warriors.

With Parker starting against the Warriors, and maybe the new Rockets, Mills hurts more than helps. Spurs would be better against those teams without him because going with both Parker or Mills on the floor for 48 minutes would be a massive uphill battle against such smart and elite perimeter oriented offenses. Spurs might be able to get away with one having a 20 minute role, but both for 48 minutes? Spurs would be lucky to win a game.

[r0drig0lac]

You're not looking at the overall picture.

Mills is a net negative against the Warriors even when his shot is on. Why is this? Because of how they exploit him routinely on the defensive end. The other 4 on defense have work harder by helping him with doubles whenever the Warriors or other smart/great teams target him. If they are not sending doubles, they are aware of the situation going on and they tend to play a step closer to the strong side action Mills is a part of -- which can leave wider/easier passing lanes for wide open 3's/layups. Spurs have to move more to recover on defense when they exploit Mills. This contributes to fatigue quicker, which in turn, can hurt the Spurs offense.

How can this hurt the offense? 1) More energy expended on defense as a whole, leads to more fatigue and inefficiency on offense -- how much exactly? I'm not sure and its hard to quantify, but its common sense if you've played basketball before. 2) With Patty on the floor against the best teams that optimize their O by exploiting the Spurs' Parker/Patty weakness, the Spurs' offense will face a set defense more often than not, because the opposition gets to optimize their offense -- which means more taking the ball out of the basket -- which means more facing a set defense for the Spurs. The best defense leads to easy offense. Bad defense leads to dependency on great half court offense ( which Spurs don't have).

For the upcoming rebuttal, " well defense isn't the problem for the Spurs, they have the 2nd best defensive rating". Yes, the Spurs have graded out as a top defense overall in the NBA -- but those stats are fools gold to a degree because they're blended in against a lot of poor teams that just play. These poor teams don't optimize every possession on either end of the floor like the great teams do when it matters most. So while this stat is great to see, I still take it with a grain of salt because I understand the context behind it and all the bad teams that simply don't pay attention to the simple details like the Spurs do consistently. Spurs attack weaknesses on both ends, 90% of other teams do not. That is what makes them so damn consistent.

At the end of the day, if Spurs traded Mills and promoted Murray and Forbes, that would give this team a better chance against the Warriors because they are not defensive liabilities ( if Forbes is implemented as the smallest guy on the court and not used at the wing). You can not have a defensive liability on the perimeter against the Warriors who has inferior size, if you do -- Warriors will attack it relentlessly and it will slowly eat away at the Spurs' overall game. Optimize the defense, where Spurs don't have to utilize doubles, where the Spurs don't have to constantly rotate over when Mills' guy gets at the rim. Optimize stops, optimize transition opportunities -- easy points and optimize the touches for Kawhi, LA, Gay, Manu and Kyle on offense. That recipe will give the Spurs the best chance against the Warriors.

good post

[ElNono]

Crazy how many posters were on board with this massive mistake. This may be the worst deal every handed out by Pop & RC.

Even Rashos deal made more sense.

Can't run a PnR to save his life.

Can't defend anyone ( as a PG hes ranked 89th in DRPM out of 94 qualified PGs).

He was one of 5 FAs to get 4 guaranteed years lol. And no, 12.5 wasn't his market last year. Rose, Rondo, Mack, Jack, Calderon all got 1 year or 1+1 deals for barely anything. Collison got a 1 +1 yr deal for 10 mil per and hes 2x the player Patty is. Even Hill got less guaranteed $ than Patty and hes 3x the player Patty is. Dont forget Livingston and his 24 Mil dollar deal over 3 years lol.

The PG position was and is most saturated in the NBA, meaning the supply is plentiful for back up point guards..which mean less demand..which drives down price. Spurs massively overpaid.

Perhaps PATFO just plainly thinks the Dubs can't be beat, and this is a thank you contract a la Malik Rose, that gives them value they can eventually move. Also, the Spurs in the TD era always had a liability on defense at the PG position, if we're being frank...

[MaNu4Tres]

Perhaps PATFO just plainly thinks the Dubs can't be beat, and this is a thank you contract a la Malik Rose, that gives them value they can eventually move. Also, the Spurs in the TD era always had a liability on defense at the PG position, if we're being frank...

The game has changed and the Warriors have moved the bar higher than its ever been. The league has never seen a perimeter offense like theirs. If you have a defensive liability on perimeter like Parker or Patty playing 48 minutes, you may as well start packing because you'll have no shot.

[tonight...you]

Perhaps PATFO just plainly thinks the Dubs can't be beat, and this is a thank you contract a la Malik Rose, that gives them value they can eventually move. Also, the Spurs in the TD era always had a liability on defense at the PG position, if we're being frank...

You just might be right, you magnificent butthole.

[spurs10]

The game has changed and the Warriors have moved the bar higher than its ever been. The league has never seen a perimeter offense like theirs. If you have a defensive liability on perimeter like Parker or Patty playing 48 minutes, you may as well start packing because you'll have no shot.

Another playoff season like last year and people outside the Bay Area will be turning off in droves. When Durbeta gave up trying to compete with a 73 win team and joined them he made the NBA one step closer to WWE. Why does anyone give a damn if Durbeta gets another ring. Even he didn’t seem too excited about it. Maybe I’m wrong and people all around the country just love them being completely uncontested in the playoffs.

[ElNono]

The game has changed and the Warriors have moved the bar higher than its ever been. The league has never seen a perimeter offense like theirs. If you have a defensive liability on perimeter like Parker or Patty playing 48 minutes, you may as well start packing because you'll have no shot.

There's no doubt about that. The real question is whether the Spurs feel they can't compete. Realistically, there's bigger fish to fry: if LMA can't abuse Draymond, we might as well pack our bags too...

[spurs10]

There's no doubt about that. The real question is whether the Spurs feel they can't compete. Realistically, there's bigger fish to fry: if LMA can't abuse Draymond, we might as well pack our bags too...

Again if the Spurs with Kawhi or the Celtics can’t compete a lot of NBA fans will need to pack their bags and go on vacation earlier. It’s the only moderately intriguing thing about watching, just hoping someone can knock them out.

Can Kawhi save the NBA!?

[Chinook]

You're not looking at the overall picture.

Mills is a net negative against the Warriors even when his shot is on. Why is this? Because of how they exploit him routinely on the defensive end. The other 4 on defense have work harder by helping him with doubles whenever the Warriors or other smart/great teams target him. If they are not sending doubles, they are aware of the situation going on and they tend to play a step closer to the strong side action Mills is a part of -- which can leave wider/easier passing lanes for wide open 3's/layups. Spurs have to move more to recover on defense when they exploit Mills. This contributes to fatigue quicker, which in turn, can hurt the Spurs offense.

How can this hurt the offense? 1) More energy expended on defense as a whole, leads to more fatigue and inefficiency on offense -- how much exactly? I'm not sure and its hard to quantify, but its common sense if you've played basketball before. 2) With Patty on the floor against the best teams that optimize their O by exploiting the Spurs' Parker/Patty weakness, the Spurs' offense will face a set defense more often than not, because the opposition gets to optimize their offense -- which means more taking the ball out of the basket -- which means more facing a set defense for the Spurs. The best defense leads to easy offense. Bad defense leads to dependency on great half court offense ( which Spurs don't have).

For the upcoming rebuttal, " well defense isn't the problem for the Spurs, they have the 2nd best defensive rating". Yes, the Spurs have graded out as a top defense overall in the NBA -- but those stats are fools gold to a degree because they're blended in against a lot of poor teams that just play. These poor teams don't optimize every possession on either end of the floor like the great teams do when it matters most. So while this stat is great to see, I still take it with a grain of salt because I understand the context behind it and all the bad teams that simply don't pay attention to the simple details like the Spurs do consistently. Spurs attack weaknesses on both ends, 90% of other teams do not. That is what makes them so damn consistent.

At the end of the day, if Spurs traded Mills and promoted Murray and Forbes, that would give this team a better chance against the Warriors because they are not defensive liabilities ( if Forbes is implemented as the smallest guy on the court and not used at the wing). You can not have a defensive liability on the perimeter against the Warriors who has inferior size, if you do -- Warriors will attack it relentlessly and it will slowly eat away at the Spurs' overall game. Optimize the defense, where Spurs don't have to utilize doubles, where the Spurs don't have to constantly rotate over when Mills' guy gets at the rim. Optimize stops, optimize transition opportunities -- easy points and optimize the touches for Kawhi, LA, Gay, Manu and Kyle on offense. That recipe will give the Spurs the best chance against the Warriors.

With Parker starting against the Warriors, and maybe the new Rockets, Mills hurts more than helps. Spurs would be better against those teams without him because going with both Parker or Mills on the floor for 48 minutes would be a massive uphill battle against such smart and elite perimeter oriented offenses. Spurs might be able to get away with one having a 20 minute role, but both for 48 minutes? Spurs would be lucky to win a game.

Just a couple of points:

The game isn't played one-on-one. It's not the worst thing in the world to have Livingston shoot a higher percentage on a couple of his shots. Mismatches aren't a big deal. Patty on Shaun, Iggy or Young/McCaw is not going to be "worse" than Tony on Barnes. They can lose that match-up handily and still win games if Patty is scoring well.

The Spurs have almost always had a strong D despite never running a defensive-minded PG. PG defense isn't a big deal.

We already know Patty's ceiling and hopefully his floor. The Spurs need him to be as good as he was. That seems more possible than Murray being better than he he's ever. Dude was benched for a reason, despite his stats (which might be the most fool's gold thing about the team if used like some folks here do).

Not doubling might sound paradigmatic, but it's not something all that bad if you plan around it well enough. Golden State doubles all the time. Ignoring that Murray is NOT a good defender right now, him getting caught on Durant is going to bring help.

The "managing possessions" game is exactly why the Spurs are running two bigs and doing this slow post-up oriented game. A healthy Spurs team will be an above average team offensively and an elite one defensively.

[dabom]

Chinook with some real insight. I guess got43s just forgets the Spurs were winning with Patty at the helm.

That dude getting worse and worse about patty. Probably cause I on his takes all the time.

[daslicer]

Another playoff season like last year and people outside the Bay Area will be turning off in droves. When Durbeta gave up trying to compete with a 73 win team and joined them he made the NBA one step closer to WWE. Why does anyone give a damn if Durbeta gets another ring. Even he didn’t seem too excited about it. Maybe I’m wrong and people all around the country just love them being completely uncontested in the playoffs.

Warriors have too many bandwagon fans all across the country who will still watch the playoffs even if the Warriors win every game 140-0. Curry looking liking a 10 year old has massive appeal to people. The Warriors popularity among bandwagon fans all over the country reminds me of the 90's bulls popularity.

[Chillen]

Warriors have too many bandwagon fans all across the country who will still watch the playoffs even if the Warriors win every game 140-0. Curry looking liking a 10 year old has massive appeal to people. The Warriors popularity among bandwagon fans all over the country reminds me of the 90's bulls popularity.

Sick of the Bulls comparisons with the Warriors. Shaq didn't sign to team up with Jordan and Pippen. Warriors had one of the games best players sign with them when they went 73-9 the previous season and beat Durant's team in the playoffs. Shaq didn't leave Orlando and sign with the Bulls with Jordan and Pippen, he went to the Lakers. Warriors have so much elite talent (Curry, Durant, Thompson, Iggy, Green) and depth they will be a really tough out unless fatigue and injurys catch up. If people want to root for them fine, but with the Durant signing any 90's Bulls comparisons squashed and they lost to Cavs after going 73-9 without KD. They are an elite team in the NBA with a stacked roster, that's it.

[SAGirl]

Perhaps PATFO just plainly thinks the Dubs can't be beat, and this is a thank you contract a la Malik Rose, that gives them value they can eventually move. Also, the Spurs in the TD era always had a liability on defense at the PG position, if we're being frank...

They paid dear Bobo too but when he started slacking off he was gone. The team went a different direction. So, I never considered Patty someone you keep the entire 4 years necessarily, specially if the team needs to go in a different direction. If anything the fact he got an above average market deal makes it so they no longer owe him any debt in good conscience if they need to trade him. Now for this season, he needs to be better than he has been the past couple of playoffs and how he has been playing lately. And it’s not even about the shooting but careless stuff. TO that shouldn’t happen to someone with his experience. Throwing the ball at the feet of bigs, that sort of needs to change. He’s already not a good PNR PG, he needs to improve that stuff.

I still think the Spurs needed to go in a different direction but they couldn’t get who they really wanted so ....

[daslicer]

Sick of the Bulls comparisons with the Warriors. Shaq didn't sign to team up with Jordan and Pippen. Warriors had one of the games best players sign with them when they went 73-9 the previous season and beat Durant's team in the playoffs. Shaq didn't leave Orlando and sign with the Bulls with Jordan and Pippen, he went to the Lakers. Warriors have so much elite talent (Curry, Durant, Thompson, Iggy, Green) and depth they will be a really tough out unless fatigue and injurys catch up. If people want to root for them fine, but with the Durant signing any 90's Bulls comparisons squashed and they lost after going 73-9.

Emotional overreaction by you and this is coming from someone who hates the Warriors and actually grew up during the 90's watching the bulls. I agree with everything you said but I wasn't comparing the teams in my original post but comparing their levels of POPULARITY among bandwagon fans. Unfortunately I see the Warriors generating the same levels of bandwagon fandom that those Bulls teams did. In every game I watch on TV I see bandwagon warrior fans fill up opposing teams arenas much like the bulls bandwagon fans did during the 90's. I know casual fans who stopped watching the NBA years ago and now watch it again due to the Warriors. It's like I have said in a previous post that Curry looking like a harmless 10 year old has attracted a lot of these casual idiots. The league knows that these casuals and bandwagon fans will watch the Warriors regardless of who they face or how boring the match up is. Look at last year when Kawhi got injured and how the media and league were very happy about it despite a series that would have gone to 6-7 games ended up being a boring sweep. I didn't bother to watch last year's finals because I felt the Warriors would sweep the Cavs and it came across to me as a very lopsided matchup. It was the first finals since 1990 that I didn't watch and keep in mind I didn't start watching basketball until '91. Judging by the results I didn't miss anything but that series got the highest finals ratings since the Jordan era.

It sucks ass but I feel the Warriors could play my hschool basketball team and beat them 200-0 and they would still get high ratings. Warriors have a ridiculous level of popularity that I haven't seen since the Jordan bulls. I hope for our sake that the popularity doesn't last as long as it did with the 90's bulls. If the Warriors go back to the finals and sweep the Cavs the ratings will be a good indicator to see if people are starting to grow bored of the Warriors. What Durant did was a low character move by joining the Warriors and he ended up ruining the game for hardcore real NBA fans but in the league and networks eyes that doesn't matter since he was able to attract a lot of casual and bandwagon fans.

[spurs10]

Warriors have too many bandwagon fans all across the country who will still watch the playoffs even if the Warriors win every game 140-0. Curry looking liking a 10 year old has massive appeal to people. The Warriors popularity among bandwagon fans all over the country reminds me of the 90's bulls popularity.

I don’t doubt they have a lot of bandwagon fans. I just think the energy and excitement has and will continue to evaporate with the “140-0” non-compe ive feel the NBA has now. The Bulls were a great team and had a lot of fans worldwide. There was an energy and excitement going on that changed the profile of the NBA. Like someone mentioned ‘Shaq’ didn’t join the Bulls. They lost on occasion.

My point is if no one can compete with Baby Face and crew then it will not be good for the NBA. Maybe I live in a vacuum, but the World Series and the Super Bowl were nationally a million times more celebrated. I didn’t see people paying much attention to the Finals. The whole playoffs involving GSW were really boring.

[spurs10]

If the Warriors go back to the finals and sweep the Cavs the ratings will be a good indicator to see if people are starting to grow bored of the Warriors. What Durant did was a low character move by joining the Warriors and he ended up ruining the game for hardcore real NBA fans but in the league and networks eyes that doesn't matter since he was able to attract a lot of casual and bandwagon fans.

[daslicer]

I don’t doubt they have a lot of bandwagon fans. I just think the energy and excitement has and will continue to evaporate with the “140-0” non-compe ive feel the NBA has now. The Bulls were a great team and had a lot of fans worldwide. There was an energy and excitement going on that changed the profile of the NBA. Like someone mentioned ‘Shaq’ didn’t join the Bulls. They lost on occasion.

My point is if no one can compete with Baby Face and crew then it will not be good for the NBA. Maybe I live in a vacuum, but the World Series and the Super Bowl were nationally a million times more celebrated. I didn’t see people paying much attention to the Finals. The whole playoffs involving GSW were really boring.

I agree with you that the Super Bowl and World series was much more exciting than the Finals . Last year throughout the whole entire playoffs I was just like you when it came to believing that nobody could be watching this bs but the Nielsen ratings revealed that the Warriors got the highest Finals ratings since the Jordan Bulls so it was disappointing. I guess that the ratings were high because they were a lot of idiots that thought Lebron could take out the Warriors but it was still disappointing to see. One thing I have noticed is ESPN is desperately trying to sell and market a Cavs-Warriors finals rematch by saying the Cavs have a chance with IT when we all know that's bs. If the re-match happens I hope the Warriors sweep the Cavs. I'm tired of this BS matchup and would enjoy the comedy of ESPN trying to spin how the Warriors going 16-0 is great for the league.

[spurs10]

I agree with you that the Super Bowl and World series was much more exciting than the Finals . Last year throughout the whole entire playoffs I was just like you when it came to believing that nobody could be watching this bs but the Nielsen ratings revealed that the Warriors got the highest Finals ratings since the Jordan Bulls so it was disappointing. I guess that the ratings were high because they were a lot of idiots that thought Lebron could take out the Warriors but it was still disappointing to see. One thing I have noticed is ESPN is desperately trying to sell and market a Cavs-Warriors finals rematch by saying the Cavs have a chance with IT when we all know that's bs. If the re-match happens I hope the Warriors sweep the Cavs. I'm tired of this BS matchup and would enjoy the comedy of ESPN trying to spin how the Warriors going 16-0 is great for the league.

Yes a 16-0 playoff will not be good for their brand!

[weeks]

And he most probably took a discount for the benefit of the team, unlike other Spurs' pgs...

[weeks]

Derrick White will be better than this head his rookie year.

good call

[Ice009]

lol. some real clowns in this thread that have never watched championship basketball. Patty never really was in the playoff rotation in 2014. He had a few good games as the 9th or 10th man and that's it.

[objective]

This thread is a wall of shame

SHAME!!!