Reply With Quote
Why not give Mills run? Pretty sure having Baynes as the backup 5 means automatic chemistry points, tbh.
Was nice having a true backup PG there for a while...
Why not give Mills run? Pretty sure having Baynes as the backup 5 means automatic chemistry points, tbh.
Do you not watch the games? Or forget them soon after they end? Mills did get a run ending two games back. He was the first guard off the bench for several games. I'm not sure if he hit a single shot. And if he's not hitting shots, he's really not that useful on the court. During Mills' run, De Colo didn't play at all (outside of a few minutes of garbage time here and there). Since Mills' run wasn't a success, Pop decided to go with De Colo beginning with the 76ers game. So the last two games, De Colo has been one of the first guards off the bench, and Patty hasn't played. De Colo was passable against the 76ers, but had pretty good energy and managed to play mostly mistake free against NO. Made some great passes, had a few good plays. So thus far, De Colo has been more successful on his current run than Mills was for his 4-5 game run. So we probably won't see Mills get much playing time for a couple more games at least, depending on how De Colo continues to progress.
De Colo hasn't exactly outplayed Mills. Pop probably prefers De Colo's slower, more controlled approach to the game. Mills was probably told to focus more on his point guard skills, hence why he didn't attempt as many shots as he normally would've.
Here's a comparison of their Quick Grades in the last few games, as given by timvp:
Patrick Mills B+ @Jan 11 against Grizzlies
Very good energy, especially on D. Hit the ground running and played hard.
Patrick Mills B Jan 13 against T'Wolves
Shot poorly but everything else was above average: most importantly his passing, rebounding and D.
Patrick Mills C+ Jan 16 against Grizzlies
Didn’t hit a shot until garbage time. Finding his own shot while running PG is proving difficult. D was subpar.
During the next game against the warriors, Mills and De Colo were evenly split the minutes at the backup point guard spot by Pop. Patty played the first half, and De Colo played the second. Most of the bench were given C grades or below.
Patrick Mills C- Jan 18 against Warriors
Scoring mysteriously vanished after given backup point guard job. Passing okay but ballhandling was dicey.
Nando De Colo C
Lively going after loose balls. Made good passes. A couple horrendous defensive plays torpedoed his value.
Now, in the last three games, Pop decided to let De Colo run the backup point guard spot.
Nando De Colo C Jan 19th against Hawks
Didn’t take care of the ball enough and dribbled too much but defense was above average and he was lively.
Nando De Colo B- Jan 21 against Sixers
Produced well. Perhaps most importantly, didn’t turn it over. Unfortunately, his playmaking was poor in the 4th.
Nando De Colo B+ Jan 23 against Hornets
Very helpful on the glass. Passed the ball well and orchestrated the show better. Adequate shot selection.
The point is, the grades between the two have been pretty even, according to what timvp's seen of the two (from a fan's perspective). I wouldn't say that De Colo's flat out beat Patty for the backup point guard spot.
Last edited by Boomersgold; 01-24-2013 at 03:32 AM.
game grades are based on expectation.
We expect De Colo to run the point better than Mills.
We expect Mills to shoot the ball better than De Colo.
Patty got a game and a half to prove himself, which in my eyes is not enough. HE had nil turnovers and had a few dimes, yes he wasn't shooting well, but when patty has his eye in he can be deadly, at least his not scared to shoot unlike decolo. PAtty seems to be a bit of a scape goat
Still hoping to see CoJo. Looks like Pop doesn't even wanna try him though.
If we pass the trade deadline with the current guys in place I expect Millsy to opt out at season end. If GN, Manu, NDC stay and CoJo on the way it's probably in his interests to see if any offers eventuate. The short term pain would be leaving 1.1m on the table, however opting in and playing 5 minutes a week would have him out of sight out of mind with all front offices and that might hurt longer term.
I wouldn't say that either. In fact, I didn't say that. Actually I really like both players, a whole lot tbh. They're very different players. Mills is a scorer, while De Colo is a distributor. And I think they will find their roles on this team and be good role players for us when Pop & Co are done with them. Sometimes, though, I feel that some people don't really pay attention to the bigger picture, to multi-game trends, that would give them a better insight into what's going on with the team, and some of the new players. I think that's a shame, as I feel this team is really special (from the perspective that we're STILL managing to stay at the top of the league even as our stars age).
So, you've quoted Timvp's grades, which make your point. But that's not relevant to the point I was making. Which simply was to paint a picture of how Pop is managing Mills' and De Colo's rolls on the team, as it 'appears to me.' So instead of the grades, what's relevant is the box scores for the last 9 games. Remember, it's not so much about who's better at this point, or who owns the roll, etc. This is my interpretation of Pop's "process" when it comes to making contributors out of these two players this season. Let's look at the numbers:
1/7 & 1/9, against the Hornets and Lakers, M&D played 1.5 minutes and 0 minutes, respectively. I view this as Pop pressing the reset button for M&D. This is Pop as psychologist. Reminding them, that it's not about them, it's about the team, and their job is to be professional and stay ready for when the minutes come. By not playing either for several games, Pop is setting the stage to begin testing them in subsequent games, to see how well they're able to maintain that readiness, which is a core component of any successful role player. Can you step in, and contribute right away, on a consistent basis, is the basic question Pop is looking to have answered.
The next game, on 1/11, Mills plays 5 and De Colo is DNP. This was the Grizz game we lost, so not the best time to be experimenting with new players in new roles. But Pop has given the nod to Mills at this point. Letting him know that he's next up, to prove what he can deliver.
The next game on the 13th, Mills plays the back up PG role. He's the first guard off the bench, plays 19:14 minutes, and goes 1-5 on 3s (2-8 over all) and has 2 turnovers. Not good for a scorer. He had good energy, but could not deliver on his one real asset, which is scoring. De Colo plays 2.5 minutes of garbage time.
Again, on the 16th against the Grizz, Mills gets the early nod, plays 13:06 to De Colo's 4:36, and again doesn't take advantage of the opportunity to up his play. He's just not showing anything for this opportunity. He's not horrible, but he's not able to contribute in any meaningful way. When you're playing for a contender, you have to grab these opportunities when they come. Mills missed out this time around, but I'm sure he'll get another chance.
At this point it's De Colo's turn. The Warrior's game is another reset, and in the next three games De Colo gets the back up spot, plays 14 minutes each game, his play is trending upwards. The last game is the first time De Colo has looked confident on the court, so in a sense his trial run has gone "better" than Mills'.
But that's really all you can say at this point. Pop tested Mills out first, and Mills wasn't able to make it work. De Colo looked better this last game, but it remains to be seen if he can keep building his confidence without playing out of control (which is what cost him playing time after a promising start to the season).
Both players have shown flashes of brilliance, and both have shown that they can't maintain that level of play on anything approaching a consistent basis thus far. But if De Colo can build on this latest performance, I would say he's in the better position to actually stick at the back up PG spot.
And that's how I hope it turns out, because to me Mills could be a great instant offense guy off the bench, but I don't think he has what it takes to be the back up PG.
Oops, what did I restart. I remember watching TJs last game. Sucked seeing him go down
I agree with capek, being from Australia, I'm a fan of Patty right now i think Mills' value is as insurance in the off-season/trade deadline for Neal, given his contract situation, rather than as a back-up PG.
All things considered, I am inclined to give more opportunity to De Colo to handle the ball off the bench. Mills is better off looking to score rather than run the offense in a motion-heavy system like the Spurs'. The other option, Neal, is just horrible when handling the ball and is a turnover waiting to happen.
De Colo has not been consistent, but has shown flashes of good PG play. Unless the Spurs make a trade or sign an amnestied/waived PG, De Colo is our best shot. Pop needs to let him play through mistakes and improve. There are 37 games left to go, and we need De Colo to get as comfortable as possible heading into the playoffs.
Anyway in the playoffs, Manu and TP's minutes will go up so Pop will have the option of letting them run more plays if De Colo struggles.
i actually don't, i thought it was a bad signing back then. Very injury prone loser that's been a liability for so many years, he also didn't do anything special with us apart from some good games here and there. Manu was the man.
Mills and Neal both are just undersized SG's.
Quite frankly, I think Manu is our second best ball handler. The thing that scares me with Manu is that it seems he's good for 2 or 3 stupid turnover passes per game. I'd just put him in at PG, inbound it to him and let him toss the ball out of bounds two plays in a row so he can get it out of his system and roll with him as our backup point. He certainly has the best court vision of anyone on this team, including TP. I'd also like to see more of De Colo on the court, I think he has a ton of potential.
TJ Ford would be great to have. Very unfortunate. The backup PG is very worrisome.
Some times Neal looks like the best option and then other games he's just awful. De Colo runs the offense great and seems to make it a lot easier for everybody else on the court compared to Neal and Patty. Patty brings great energy defensively but other than that, he doesn't do anything offensively that Neal can't do IMO.
I'm afraid the playoffs might be too big a stage for De Colo to take over the spot completely so Neal is still probably the best option at this point. Just pray that Manu is completely healthy and able to dominate the ball when he's out there with that second unit because if he isn't able to do that then we are definitely in trouble.
Obviously there shouldn't ever be a scenario where Tony or Manu isn't on the court come playoff time.
"sucks" is over the top unless we're talking about his play as a point guard. I think that Patty's best role is essentially Neal's role but at this point Pop's not going to play Mills in place of Neal if he can help it. De Colo seems kind of European to me in the sense that he needs extended minutes in order to show what he's capable of. You're not really going to see his full abilities in spot minutes whereas with Mills it's a little bit different.
Not many bench players can give 10 points in 15 mins of playing time. Im pretty sure that Patty's helped bring us back in games where we are down 15+ points with his instant offense, and high energy. The fact that De Colo has gotten similar grades during his stint as back up pg shows that he hasn't exactly been more successful in that position, especially when De Colo is paired with Manu.
Although, tbh, I don't see either of them getting the job on the future. If Pop wanted them, he would developed them more instead of Neal.
Yeah I miss Johnny Moore and Rod Strickland too but those days are gone.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but mill was on fire against Utah, hit 5 three pointers and was looking like getting the spurs over the line.
Agree 100% with all of this. De Colo, I think, has about a 10% chance of putting it all together enough this season to contribute as the back up PG in the playoffs. The only reason I give him that much of a chance is because, when he's playing with confidence, I think he's a great fit with his court vision, passing skills, and length. From what I've seen though he's like a lot of first year players, a mistake here and there hurts his confidence enough that he starts pressing and making mistakes. If he can learn not to do that, he might have a chance to break into the playoff rotation.
I agree De Colo has been impressive and he is definitely more of a true PG compared to the other two guys but the playoffs are a different game as we all know. Not everybody is cut from the Kawhi Leonard/stoneface mold. De Colo has struggled with his shot and he will definitely get open looks come playoff time if he's out there. We know what Gary can do under pressure when it comes to shooting the ball. As for defense, he is already a better defender then Neal (not saying much) with his length and size but would he be able to match the physicality that the playoffs bring? It's a totally different game then the regular season and putting all your cards in his hand as the primary backup PG is very risky.
Most definitely. 10% is probably too high by half at least, that number is probably a product of the promise I see in De Colo for the future. The playoff rotation will most likely shrink to Tony, Manu, and Neal as the primary ball handlers. De Colo is definitely on the outside looking in. On the other hand, remember how bad our offense looked at stretches in those last 4 games against OKC? That was because our ball movement would grind to a halt, for stretches we were totally unable to do the #1 thing that made our offense work so well. De Colo's court vision is special imo, so I believe if De Colo is able to play well enough in the remainder of the season to at least indicate that he "could" be effective as things get tougher in the playoffs, it would be worth it to have him included in the playoff rotation at least at the beginning, to see if he can hang and potentially alleviate the return of any issues with maintaining the ball movement which is so important to this team's offensive success.
That's a good point. Although, I feel like this years team and last years team are a lot different. Mainly defensively. I know Pop wants to use the "stolen iden y" card when it comes to last years WCF, and he's right. But the Spurs ultimately lost that series because they couldn't get stops. This years team seems so much better defensively and the #s back that up so far this season. I'm not overly concerned about the offense if everyone is healthy.On the other hand, remember how bad our offense looked at stretches in those last 4 games against OKC? That was because our ball movement would grind to a halt, for stretches we were totally unable to do the #1 thing that made our offense work so well.
The offense has one worse aspect this season though: Turnovers. Thankfully the turnover differential is better because the Spurs are better at forcing opponent turnovers.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
