Dear pop: Tony is DONE

[Clipper Nation]

Has their ever been a Spur that's been the target of so much hate..especially over such a long period of time? Unprecedented tbh

Manu, Kawhi, Bonner, Jefferson, LMA, MVPau...

Meanwhile, Porker is so coddled that the vast majority of threads that speak the truth about his play are deleted, locked or merged on sight

Porker stans are literally the Spurs' equivalent of Kobe stans. Same blind defending of a cancer. Same at ude that criticism and facts = "hate."

[Cry Havoc]

Manu, Kawhi, Bonner, Jefferson, LMA, MVPau...

Meanwhile, Porker is so coddled that the vast majority of threads that speak the truth about his play are deleted, locked or merged on sight

Maybe it's because the posters that criticize the other players aren't attention s? You know, like a certain fan who not only posts on an other team's website but also in their fan section?

[bklynspursfan]

Some posters on here

The only people surprised by him making shots are trolls. If nothing else, he is a capable mid range shooter/finisher in the paint. He has struggled this year, but when you factor in struggling this year, vs what he's done in previous years, the sample size is small, and he should turn it around.

Now he's got lots of mileage, so it won't happen nightly. But he's still someone who can help at times. Defensively is where is biggest issue is, and that's just not going to change. Starting Murray would make us a very, very poor team haha.

[bklynspursfan]

Maybe it's because the posters that criticize the other players aren't attention s? You know, like a certain fan who not only posts on an other team's website but also in their fan section?

Burn

[dabom]

Manu, Kawhi, Bonner, Jefferson, LMA, MVPau...

Meanwhile, Porker is so coddled that the vast majority of threads that speak the truth about his play are deleted, locked or merged on sight

Porker stans are literally the Spurs' equivalent of Kobe stans. Same blind defending of a cancer. Same at ude that criticism and facts = "hate."

He's got family dude...

[DarrinS]

He's in the top 40 based on PER. Could be worse, I guess.

http://insider.espn.com/nba/hollinge.../_/position/pg

[gambit1990]

tony shouldn't be starting, shouldn't be on the court as much as he is. his "defense" is awful.

he's lucky he didn't have to go up against isiah last night. when the spurs played the celtics a few weeks ago isiah had three times as many points and twice as many assists as parker.

[palangi]

Murray is far worse than Parker right now.

Not true

[Cry Havoc]

Not true

wtf. Murray is barely an NBA player. If he was given 30 minutes a game he'd have 10 turnovers.

[palangi]

no ... most of us here agree that his role has to be limited and we can only expect a good game here or there .... but that is still way better than anything Murray can bring to the table

and andy trading suggestions are pipe dreams ...

Just not true at all.

Defensively alone Murray is head and shoulders above Tony. Ball handling wise he is just as equal. On the big league club I believe that Murray would be more of a facilitator, something Parker refuses to do. Shooting wise there isn't as much difference as you would think. And then playmaking wise Murray will be superior.

I'm sorry you are afraid of playing young guys and living with some mistakes. But getting Murray up on the second unit is a better option than Parker on the 1st unit. And on the second unit he will be with Manu who can help out as well. But why not get him experience at the big league level? There is a reason that we start slow every game and Parker is one of those reasons. why not look to the future. Let the kid grow up on the big stage. Around professional talent.

[palangi]

wtf. Murray is barely an NBA player. If he was given 30 minutes a game he'd have 10 turnovers.

That's just it. Nobody is saying he needs that much time. And He does have NBA qualities right now. And i doubt he would turnover as much. He wouldn't be expected to do as much as he is at the NBDL level. Plus we still have Lapro who can play if Murray is having an off night. And you never know maybe he really blossoms?

[apalisoc_9]

Manu, Kawhi, Bonner, Jefferson, LMA, MVPau...

Meanwhile, Porker is so coddled that the vast majority of threads that speak the truth about his play are deleted, locked or merged on sight

Porker stans are literally the Spurs' equivalent of Kobe stans. Same blind defending of a cancer. Same at ude that criticism and facts = "hate."

[Cry Havoc]

That's just it. Nobody is saying he needs that much time. And He does have NBA qualities right now. And i doubt he would turnover as much. He wouldn't be expected to do as much as he is at the NBDL level. Plus we still have Lapro who can play if Murray is having an off night. And you never know maybe he really blossoms?

If he was given more minutes it would presumably be against better players, since it would increase his odds of playing against starters. His turnover rate would likely increase, since he's coughed it up to scrubs this season.

Look, I really like Murray, when given space his handles are insane. But he's just not ready for regular minutes in the league yet. Decent prospect though.

[cd98]

I'll interject only to say that we should reduce the number of stupid threads on the board, and I'd start with this one. Because it is either a troll-worthy thread or based on stupidity that anyone would suggest a team that has one of the best records in the NBA and is a le contender should bench the starting point guard who has played within himself for the most part, and who still possesses dribbling and passing skills and knowledge for how to run a team (including several championship teams) for a rookie drafted with one of the last picks in the first round that played point guard in college and is still not old enough to buy alcohol legally and has never led an NBA team and has shown to be completely lost in every NBA game he has played in.

You want to start a "Start Patty" thread, I can kind of see that, but a bench Tony for Murray thread was dumb this summer, and its even dumber now that we've seen he's three seasons away from being a contributor in an NBA game.

[Hoops Czar]

Manu, Kawhi, Bonner, Jefferson, LMA, MVPau...

Meanwhile, Porker is so coddled that the vast majority of threads that speak the truth about his play are deleted, locked or merged on sight

Porker stans are literally the Spurs' equivalent of Kobe stans. Same blind defending of a cancer. Same at ude that criticism and facts = "hate."

Coddled? You shouldn't be throwing out big boy words if you don't know what they mean. The Parker hate has gotten so bad, it's actually driving people away from the forum. Parker hate threads outnumber all other threads combined by a ratio of 4/1. No other player gets that kind of treatment. Not even TOSB Turnobili.

[palangi]

If he was given more minutes it would presumably be against better players, since it would increase his odds of playing against starters. His turnover rate would likely increase, since he's coughed it up to scrubs this season.

Look, I really like Murray, when given space his handles are insane. But he's just not ready for regular minutes in the league yet. Decent prospect though.

I'm not saying he should play a lot of minutes. I think Mills get the majority of minutes with Lapro getting some as well. But 10-15 minutes wouldn't be a bad thing. Especially if he is playing against backups too. I just feel that he would give us more than what Parker does. Defense alone proves this.

[palangi]

I'll interject only to say that we should reduce the number of stupid threads on the board, and I'd start with this one. Because it is either a troll-worthy thread or based on stupidity that anyone would suggest a team that has one of the best records in the NBA and is a le contender should bench the starting point guard who has played within himself for the most part, and who still possesses dribbling and passing skills and knowledge for how to run a team (including several championship teams) for a rookie drafted with one of the last picks in the first round that played point guard in college and is still not old enough to buy alcohol legally and has never led an NBA team and has shown to be completely lost in every NBA game he has played in.

You want to start a "Start Patty" thread, I can kind of see that, but a bench Tony for Murray thread was dumb this summer, and its even dumber now that we've seen he's three seasons away from being a contributor in an NBA game.

I'd say your reply falls right in line with stupidity!

[cd98]

I'm not saying he should play a lot of minutes. I think Mills get the majority of minutes with Lapro getting some as well. But 10-15 minutes wouldn't be a bad thing. Especially if he is playing against backups too. I just feel that he would give us more than what Parker does. Defense alone proves this.

It's like you've never seen Murray play in a real NBA game. He's a long way off.

[palangi]

It's like you've never seen Murray play in a real NBA game. He's a long way off.

very subjective. But I don't agree. I don't think parker us much more at this point either. So I say go with the future and the young kid

[Cry Havoc]

I'm not saying he should play a lot of minutes. I think Mills get the majority of minutes with Lapro getting some as well. But 10-15 minutes wouldn't be a bad thing. Especially if he is playing against backups too. I just feel that he would give us more than what Parker does. Defense alone proves this.

I don't think you know what the word "proves" means.

Relax, dude. Watch the NBA a little bit before you say stuff like this - because anyone who's been watching a while is just going to chuckle at you and pat your head. You clearly have no idea how much damage a rookie with no feel for the game and no ball control vs NBA players can do. 10-15 bad minutes could lose us a vast majority of close games. The worst NBA backups are better than all but the 2-3 best players in college. The worst guy Murray sees on the court could/would start for any college team in the country and do a lot of damage as a starter.

[palangi]

I don't think you know what the word "proves" means.

Relax, dude. Watch the NBA a little bit before you say stuff like this - because anyone who's been watching a while is just going to chuckle at you and pat your head. You clearly have no idea how much damage a rookie with no feel for the game and no ball control vs NBA players can do. 10-15 bad minutes could lose us a vast majority of close games. The worst NBA backups are better than all but the 2-3 best players in college. The worst guy Murray sees on the court could/would start for any college team in the country and do a lot of damage as a starter.

I don't think you know what "proves" means. Because a ing rock on the court is a better defender than Parker. Your defense of parker, as weak as it is, is better than parker's defense.
That proves it!

[cd98]

I don't think you know what "proves" means. Because a ing rock on the court is a better defender than Parker. Your defense of parker, as weak as it is, is better than parker's defense.
That proves it!

Murray is not any better defender than Tony. Spurs have survived and thrived in a team defense despite Tony being a bad defender for years. Also, Murray can't shoot (He makes Parker look like Ray Allen) and he needs more muscle to finish in the lane in the NBA where he lacks any craftiness around the rim (a la Parker). Again, the idea of pushing a guy that is best served to play in the D League for the next two years into the starting line up or pushing Parker off the floor completely, who has had played steady on a team that is going through a lot of changes, makes no sense. You think Parker is bad, at least he knows the team defense scheme. Murray is light years behind and it is well-do ented that it takes normal players the better part of a year to learn the Spurs team defense. For a rookie, that curve is even bigger (and we aren't losing any games because of Parker...in fact, we play better with him on the court).

[cd98]

When the Spurs are not a top 5 team in the league (currently 2/3 and one game out of first), then you can start calling for radical changes, like benching our starting PG in favor of a rookie who's best games this year have been in the D-League.

[palangi]

Murray is not any better defender than Tony. Spurs have survived and thrived in a team defense despite Tony being a bad defender for years. Also, Murray can't shoot (He makes Parker look like Ray Allen) and he needs more muscle to finish in the lane in the NBA where he lacks any craftiness around the rim (a la Parker). Again, the idea of pushing a guy that is best served to play in the D League for the next two years into the starting line up or pushing Parker off the floor completely, who has had played steady on a team that is going through a lot of changes, makes no sense. You think Parker is bad, at least he knows the team defense scheme. Murray is light years behind and it is well-do ented that it takes normal players the better part of a year to learn the Spurs team defense. For a rookie, that curve is even bigger (and we aren't losing any games because of Parker...in fact, we play better with him on the court).

why survive? and you are crazy and blind if you think tony and Dejounte are the same level of defender.
Not really worth going on with this conversation if you are this ignorant.

[palangi]

When the Spurs are not a top 5 team in the league (currently 2/3 and one game out of first), then you can start calling for radical changes, like benching our starting PG in favor of a rookie who's best games this year have been in the D-League.

Did anyone say bench tony for Murray? I think most have said to start Mills. But nice try being dramatic. But you are making up.