Reply With Quote
Not to mention that he can actually shoot.
I actually like Paul’s defensive potential more than Simmon’s.
Not to mention that he can actually shoot.
Literally four responses before yours.
Also Paul probably fits into an offense scheme better, passing, moving within the context of the offense.
After one game, he's down to fifth on the team (with Pau leading the team by a decent margin) and 16th in the league. It's just one of the many cautionary tales about taking stats out of context.
He said Patty mills is better on defense than DJ... U really backing him up on that?
Difference is that gay guarded the best player when he was in Sacramento... Kyle was guarding bench scrubs in blowouts
So he is a good passer because of where he was drafted? So what does that make Simmons? Magic Johnson?
Gay didn't guard the best player. Well, I don't know that for sure, but I strongly doubt he did anything besides guard small-forwards, some of whom were the best scorers on their team, and some of them sucking it up. Of course, Kyle's stats were actually so much better than Gay's that it's almost pointless to try to qualify them, but that's neither here nor there this year.
Is the sky blue in ur world chin??
Rgay never guarded the best players??
Just youtube Rgay vs Insert Best Player here.
Ive done a few for you btw just incase youtube only allows you to search for Kyle Anderson videos in ur world.
I would love to see stats by KA which are better than Rgays?
My reality does not show any btw
I mean who would Pick KA over Rgay In basketball??
Spoiler Alert: Chin and SAChick
I swear you and that SAChick are bonkers.
KA will never be as good as RGay before and even after Rudys injury.
oh and which One of you scrubs said Anderson was good because he stole the ball from Lebron?? LOL
I swear im at the point where i actually think you and SAChick are KAs mom, boyfriend and or stalker...Sickening.
Last edited by LittleCriminal; 10-26-2017 at 12:10 PM.
Lil C with the "I didn't actually read anything but really wanted to PMS all over the forum anyway" goods.
At least it wasn't the wall of irrelevant videos you posted earlier.
Chin with the "I didn't actually read/watch anything but really wanted to PMS all over the forum anyway" goods.
Rudy has been playing very well for the team. He’s been a great addition. And he will mke a difference in many more games through the season.
Kyle has also played his role well. That’s the part the little haters will not credit. So there’s no point. Let the trolls troll. On ignore you go for a while. It’s waste of time.
I read it. It was just irrelevant. You're a Lil C dude who thinks hyperfocusing on a guy who's playing well in an effort to say he's not is a good use of your time. I guess it could be. Just sees lame to me.
Honestly this is the first time I can see Kyle being a competent NBA player. He doesn't seem as timid as before and seems to be rebounding better than ever. And I say that as someone who has been very hard on him over the years.
Rudy Gay has been an absolute steal. I'm shocked that he's fit in this quickly. Nice to see hm play within the offense instead of trying to hero ball it.
It feels like before the Spurs wanted to beat you with size form their bigs, but now even their backcourt is starting to show some length which should make for some interesting matchups this season.
The truth Amused.
Except I didn't take anything out of context. I've watched every second of every game so far and I realized that Murray's defense is really good and has an impact on that side of the floor that neither Tony nor Patty can ever dream of achieve.
Nobody expects the PG of a team to be the leader on defensive efficiency for an entire season, I just commented that fact because it was true at the moment and it highlighted the fact that Murray is a very good defender and gives the Spurs another dimension on that end of the floor that neither Tony nor Patty can provide.
And of course Pau is going to be at the top of that stat. Size always matters when it comes to defense. Last night when Pop went with the no bigmen lineup the Heat had a layup drill (having Murray on those lineups is probably what sent him down to 5, tbh). And because size always matters when it comes to defense is that I say that Murray >>>>>>>>> any of Tony or Mills on that end, and it's one of the reasons why DJ should keep his starting position and not play as SG.
The point is that DRtg wasn't stable and should not have been used. You've accused me of being anti-stat, but I am not. I do like to keep them in their mathematical context, though. Murray had three very good games and one subpar but not horrible game. That's fine. The jury is still out on how he's going to play going forward, just like it is with this particular iteration of Danny Green 2.0. I desperately hope both stay up. But they probably won't be nearly as good going forward.
In this past game, Murray's defensive impact was pretty much negated by the first PG he's faced who's been playing well this year. Even though the Spurs won the rebounding battle easily again, the Heat kept Murray mostly off the boards. Murray's crazy shooting fell off. His passes were actually better than I've seen from him this year, which was really nice. But it's not hard seeing how Parker or Mills could come in and give a better net performance. We need a lot more data before projecting anything with confidence. I love the intangibles I've seen from DeJounte as well, but those are still untested in moments where both Parker and Patty have shined. The PG battle isn't over.
Pau is leading the league in DBPM. It's not a "well, duh" kinda thing. It is somewhat a quirk in the stats and somewhat a purposeful strategy by Pop to not trust Pau in unfavorable situations.
Do you expect Murray to be the player he is now forever? You don't expect any kind of development from him? Because if you do I don't understand how you can say that Murray "won't be as good going forward". I not only expect him to "be as good going forward", I expect him to get even better, like most second year players do when they are given the chance and time to develop. Sure, I expect him to be very up and down, to have a ton of ty games, but that's perfectly normal. You have to allow the kid to make mistakes if you want him to develop.
Outside of a couple games in the last playoffs, Parker has pretty much been a 0 net rating for the past four seasons in a row. If he mantains that (which I don't see why it would change being a year older and coming off an almost career ending injury) I don't see how it wouldn't be "hard seeing him come in and have a better net performance than Murray", tbh.In this past game, Murray's defensive impact was pretty much negated by the first PG he's faced who's been playing well this year. Even though the Spurs won the rebounding battle easily again, the Heat kept Murray mostly off the boards. Murray's crazy shooting fell off. His passes were actually better than I've seen from him this year, which was really nice. But it's not hard seeing how Parker or Mills could come in and give a better net performance. We need a lot more data before projecting anything with confidence. I love the intangibles I've seen from DeJounte as well, but those are still untested in moments where both Parker and Patty have shined. The PG battle isn't over.[/b]
But for the sake of argument, let's say that yes. That Tony and Mills somehow manage to have "a better net rating performance" than Murray for this season. Is it worth to have that "better net rating performance" (which in any case will never be very substantial) over the chance of giving Murray the minutes needed for his development?
You are not seeing the full picture here. Tony and Mills already are what they are, they offer no future whatsoever, they can't do anything to help the Spurs reach another level. Murray can. To me it's a lot more worth it to give Murray all the chances possible to become the best player he can be, than rolling with something that we all already know it's not good enough to win a championship. It's not enough now and it will certainly not be enough in the future.
Last edited by DAF86; 10-26-2017 at 03:23 PM.
Um, no, I said I was backing up on what I said earlier.
This doesn't really address anything. Murray can "get better" in the way you seem to mean and not "be as good going forward" in the way that I mean. Your point is relying on a small sample that's already normalizing. He's not going to be better than he was when you started bragging about defensive rating. No one will ever actually be that good. That's why it was pointless to even mention it. The interpretation you chose is more interesting, even if it's not what I meant. Do I expect Murray to improve? Of course. Do I expect Murray to be consistently good enough to lock down the starting job this season? I'm not nearly as sure of that. To put it into perspective, Murray's rating fell so far from just that game that he likely had a negative net rating. We don't know yet if that's going to be the way he is going forward, if he's going to be closer to the first three games, or if he's going to be around his current average. He could be somewhere along that continuum. It's too early to tell, especially to tell how he'd handle himself in a playoff situation. That's a reality check, not a put-down. It's a long-ass season, and there's very little we know yet.
A net-zero may well be better than Murray does. Of course, those "couple of games last year" were games the team absolutely had to win, that could outweigh slightly positive performances from Murray, which is already an optimistic notion.Outside of a couple games in the last playoffs, Parker has pretty much been a 0 net rating for the past four seasons in a row. If he mantains that (which I don't see why it would change being a year older and coming off an almost career ending injury) I don't see how it wouldn't be "hard seeing him come in and have a better net performance than Murray", tbh.
yes. Murray can develop on the bench. By no means does the team need to set the table for him if he's not barging through that door demanding food.But for the sake of argument, let's say that yes. That Tony and Mills somehow manage to have "a better net rating performance" than Murray for this season. Is it worth to have that "better net rating performance" (which in any case will never be very substantial) over the chance of giving Murray the minutes needed for his development?
Parker was playing well enough for the team to win a le last year. They didn't lose because he wasn't good enough. So this whole, "We know Mills and Parker are inadequate" line is bull . Murray is a lottery ticket, yes. But he's also a player. If he wants the job, he needs to win it. He has a ton of room to make a case. Four games was never going to be enough to seal the deal. That's not his fault. It's just math. But he has to actually play for the next month or so and post good games and solid games. He can't just be big and fast and unable to shoot. He can do that next to Mills in the second unit and be fine. Playing guys who haven't earned it over others because they're young is what loser franchises do.You are not seeing the full picture here. Tony and Mills already are what they are, they offer no future whatsoever, they can't do anything to help the Spurs reach another level. Murray can. To me it's a lot more worth it to give Murray all the chances possible to become the best player he can be, than rolling with something that we all already know it's not good enough to win a championship. It's not enough now and it will certainly not be enough in the future.
And again, since this apparently gets forgotten every time I post, I think Murray should start based on what I've seen so far. I would not start Parker over him just because. But I do think Tony could hit the ground running (he's even more "ahead of schedule" than Gay is) and take the job back, and I would not be surprised if Tony earns the right to close games even if he plays off the bench. DeJounte himself said that nothing is given.
That was my understanding also.
Way too long to answer part by part, all I'm going to say is that yes, of course we don't know how Murray is going to perform from now on. If he sucks ass from here untill Tony's return, of course I'm not going to ask for Murray to keep the starting role. It's just common sense. I thought we were both in the same page of arguing about Murray in the hypothetical case that he keeps more or less the same kind of performances that he's putting right now, i.e: 2 or 3 good to very good ones mixed up with the inevitable ty ones. If Murray keeps this up, he should definitely remain as the starter when Parker gets back.
P/S: No, we were never going to beat GS last season, with or without injuries.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
