Blackjack
08-10-2008, 03:08 AM
I've been seeing alot of threads and topics concerning Tony lately so WTF here goes... (This could get lengthy) :smokin
Here's my thoughts on 3 of the more popular Tony topics-
-Where Tony ranks:
Tony is a top 5 point guard in the league. I'd say between 3-5 but it's an opinion and that's it. The way I see it there might be 3 or 4 better points depending on criteria, but if you're asking me who I'd take above him (factoring age and ability) the only players I'd take above him are Paul and Williams.
-Tony v Manu:
Tony fans love to bag on Manu and Manu fans love to bag on Tony. Manu fans would have you believe Tony's a ball-hog and Tony fans would have you believe Manu purposely tries to steal Tony's shine. It's almost as if some fans believe there's some kind of rift/rivalry between them. The arguments can be entertaining at times (well, rarely:() but get real, there's no spite involved. Now, if you believe Tony and Manu can detract from each others game because the strengths of their skill-sets are too similar? I'd tend to agree.
Now you'd never confuse Manu and Tony's game on the surface, but boil them down and they're both slashers who are much more effective with the ball. Dont get me wrong. That's not all they are, but I actually believe that's one of the reasons the Spurs go into scoring droughts at times. The Spurs have been able to win 3 titles with them (so it's obviously not a fatal flaw) but the offense can become disjointed and teams are able to pack the paint against them when the outside shots aren't falling. I'm not saying one of them needs to be traded, just that (offensively speaking) they're not the ideal fit skill-wise which can be a detriment to them individually and to the teams overall offensive flow at times.
-Tony's future with the Spurs:
For the most part, it seems most on this board believe Tony's the future and the guy you have to keep and build around. While I understand the logic,(he's young, talented, and a PG) I'm not sure I agree that he's the type of player you build around.
To me Tony's an all-star player, but best suited to play the sidekick role. Sure he could start on most teams, but to me he's just not an M.V.P./ franchise level player. Granted, he's young and could prove me wrong, but I just don't see it. I also don't see Tony wanting to play the role of A.I. on the Sixers for the Spurs. That's what he'd be dealing with in the post Duncan era. The Spurs would most likely be mired in mediocrity struggling to build around a scoring point guard. I'm not saying Tony and A.I. are one in the same, just that it would be similar situations.
I'm not looking to get rid of Tony but it might actually serve both parties better in the long run if he is dealt. The Spurs are going to have a hard time signing a marquee free-agent in 2010, so maybe dealing Tony for a player that might be easier to build around is the way to go. Again, I'm not saying Tony needs to go, but if he ends up wanting to go to L.A.? I'm not sure what the Lakers team or payroll will look like in the next couple of years, but he'd probably have to be traded there. If that ends up being the case maybe Bynum becomes available with Pau still relatively young? It's not a likely scenario, but the Lakers seem like a logical choice for Tony so I'm just throwing it out there. (Just the thought of trading with the Lakers make me nauseous.) There's plenty of other options out there and if the Spurs could get the right player while sending Tony to a team (preferably on the east coast) that could be a contender with his arrival? It could be a win/win for both camps.
As a fan I'd like to see the "Big 3" all retire as Spurs, but not if it means having to watch Tony play out the rest of his career on a mediocre Spurs team. All I know is that, whatever happens... The Spurs' F.O. has alot of tough decisions to make over the next couple of seasons. Here's hoping they make the right ones. :toast
Here's my thoughts on 3 of the more popular Tony topics-
-Where Tony ranks:
Tony is a top 5 point guard in the league. I'd say between 3-5 but it's an opinion and that's it. The way I see it there might be 3 or 4 better points depending on criteria, but if you're asking me who I'd take above him (factoring age and ability) the only players I'd take above him are Paul and Williams.
-Tony v Manu:
Tony fans love to bag on Manu and Manu fans love to bag on Tony. Manu fans would have you believe Tony's a ball-hog and Tony fans would have you believe Manu purposely tries to steal Tony's shine. It's almost as if some fans believe there's some kind of rift/rivalry between them. The arguments can be entertaining at times (well, rarely:() but get real, there's no spite involved. Now, if you believe Tony and Manu can detract from each others game because the strengths of their skill-sets are too similar? I'd tend to agree.
Now you'd never confuse Manu and Tony's game on the surface, but boil them down and they're both slashers who are much more effective with the ball. Dont get me wrong. That's not all they are, but I actually believe that's one of the reasons the Spurs go into scoring droughts at times. The Spurs have been able to win 3 titles with them (so it's obviously not a fatal flaw) but the offense can become disjointed and teams are able to pack the paint against them when the outside shots aren't falling. I'm not saying one of them needs to be traded, just that (offensively speaking) they're not the ideal fit skill-wise which can be a detriment to them individually and to the teams overall offensive flow at times.
-Tony's future with the Spurs:
For the most part, it seems most on this board believe Tony's the future and the guy you have to keep and build around. While I understand the logic,(he's young, talented, and a PG) I'm not sure I agree that he's the type of player you build around.
To me Tony's an all-star player, but best suited to play the sidekick role. Sure he could start on most teams, but to me he's just not an M.V.P./ franchise level player. Granted, he's young and could prove me wrong, but I just don't see it. I also don't see Tony wanting to play the role of A.I. on the Sixers for the Spurs. That's what he'd be dealing with in the post Duncan era. The Spurs would most likely be mired in mediocrity struggling to build around a scoring point guard. I'm not saying Tony and A.I. are one in the same, just that it would be similar situations.
I'm not looking to get rid of Tony but it might actually serve both parties better in the long run if he is dealt. The Spurs are going to have a hard time signing a marquee free-agent in 2010, so maybe dealing Tony for a player that might be easier to build around is the way to go. Again, I'm not saying Tony needs to go, but if he ends up wanting to go to L.A.? I'm not sure what the Lakers team or payroll will look like in the next couple of years, but he'd probably have to be traded there. If that ends up being the case maybe Bynum becomes available with Pau still relatively young? It's not a likely scenario, but the Lakers seem like a logical choice for Tony so I'm just throwing it out there. (Just the thought of trading with the Lakers make me nauseous.) There's plenty of other options out there and if the Spurs could get the right player while sending Tony to a team (preferably on the east coast) that could be a contender with his arrival? It could be a win/win for both camps.
As a fan I'd like to see the "Big 3" all retire as Spurs, but not if it means having to watch Tony play out the rest of his career on a mediocre Spurs team. All I know is that, whatever happens... The Spurs' F.O. has alot of tough decisions to make over the next couple of seasons. Here's hoping they make the right ones. :toast