skones wrote:coolhandluke121 wrote:
He'll have to sustain it a little longer, but I absolutely agree. I played devil's advocate for the contract all along because I felt he had the potential to shoot the 3 much better this year. His form is terrific and it's not unusual for someone his age to make a leap in that department. If he sustains it until the deadline, he's got positive value. If he sustains it all year, he's a huge asset.
It's becoming a bit of a social fad to see who can diss him harder regardless of whether he's actually performing. I'll grant that he's a bad player if he's not hitting his 3's, but that's true of literally hundreds of perimeter players around the league, including many who make more money than Pat and are still considered assets. His RPM is actually very good for his contract, although it won't be if he goes back to hitting 35% of his 3's.
Pat's contract is also the only reason they were able to operate this far over the cap and have this salary slot available for a trade because they had his Early Bird rights. People should be glad the Bucks were willing to raise the payroll that much. I'm keeping him for now and betting on his improved stroke.
The problem is that Pat has had stretches like this before only to take precipitous drops later on. There is no "devils advocate" for the contract because even if Connaughton does outplay it, there's no real excuse for being bent over a barrel by his agent at the time of signing. We gave him far more than he was worth and his current play doesn't change that. If you think he's going to outplay his current value, you use that to your advantage and create a value deal for your situation. You don't pay him more and hope he lives up to it. That's nonsensical. If you're making a deal for the purpose of a salary slot you CERTAINLY don't give him a third year, and you CERTAINLY don't give him a PO.
Oct 17 48.4%
Nov 17 40.0%
Feb 18 40.0%
Mar 19 41.4%
Feb 20 50.0%
So when you say, "he'll have to sustain it for a little longer," I think it's more for the entirety of the season.
But what if both parties (the Bucks and Pat+his agent) knew that Pat had recently made improvement in his shooting, and that this improvement would continue? If they both knew this, and Pat wanted to get paid fairly - in a multi-year bird deal that doesn't count against the Bucks cap - based on how both sides believed he would perform, then you could argue it's a smart move by the Bucks.
In his last 52 games (this year, last year's playoffs, and the final 25 games of the regular season), Pat has a 3p% of 40%. That is a decent sample size.
