Monroe: Two Missed Shots Leave Parker Vexed

[duncan228]

Two missed shots leave Parker vexed (http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/Two_missed_shots_leave_Parker_vexed.html)
Mike Monroe - Express-News

Spurs point guard Tony Parker approached Sunday's game against the Orlando Magic intent on atoning for his performance against the Magic on Dec. 18, when he missed 14-of-17 shots in a 90-78 loss.

Had it not been for his 21st and 22nd shots in Sunday's game, Parker might have departed the AT&T Center satisfied he had accomplished his goal.

Instead, he was equally aggravated. His 31 points, on 13-for-22 shooting, were spoiled by critical misses in the final 53.9 seconds of a 105-98 loss.

Adding to Parker's pique: Both misses were on shots he typically makes, a teardrop runner and a three-foot layup.

“That's my shots,” Parker said. “The teardrop is my shot, and it didn't go in. Then the layup went short. I do those shots every day.”

Either shot could have been a game changer had it gone in.

Parker's first miss came at the end of a fast break that started when Manu Ginobili picked off an ill-advised cross-court pass by Magic guard J.J. Redick with just under one minute remaining.

Parker drove the right side of the lane and floated his teardrop runner, but it bounced off the side of the rim and was rebounded by Orlando's Hedo Turkoglu.

Parker got a second chance to trim Orlando's lead to two points when Redick missed a 3-point attempt with 38 seconds left.

Spurs forward Tim Duncan rebounded Redick's miss and fired an outlet pass to Parker, already at midcourt. Parker got past the Magic defense all the way to the rim, but his layup dropped off the front of the rim and was rebounded by Dwight Howard.

“Sometimes that happens,” Parker said. “That's basketball, and I can't worry about that. It just meant it was not our night.”

Parker outscored Orlando's outstanding point guard, Jameer Nelson, 31-22, but it was Nelson who made the biggest shots for the Magic, a 3-pointer with 2:18 left that gave his team a 100-96 lead, and a 16-footer with 1:27 remaining that put Orlando ahead by six, 102-96.

Questioning calls: Asked to comment on officiating that had appeared to vex some of his players, Spurs coach Gregg Popovich repeated an oft-heard Spurs dictum:

“We don't talk about calls,” he said. “There are a lot of things you can control to win a game. They played better than we did and shot the ball better. It had nothing to do with the referees' calls.”

Well, sometimes the Spurs do talk about calls.

Unprompted, Duncan referenced the officiating in describing his frustration about the loss.

“It was definitely up there,” Duncan said, describing his level of frustration. “A lot of things not going our way, and one of them, mainly, obviously, the officiating. I didn't think it was very good.”

[lefty]

TP's next signature move in 2k10

Book it

[raspsa]

Parker also had an open jumper w/c he airballed.. very strange. I guess he'll be having another sleepless night tonight thinking about those misses the hopefully come out motivated to play against the Lakers.

[Ice009]

Can people around here stop saying BOOK IT.

The only thing that should be booked around here is the posters ;).

fucking idiotic saying.

[m33p0]

“It was definitely up there,” Duncan said, describing his level of frustration. “A lot of things not going our way, and one of them, mainly, obviously, the officiating. I didn't think it was very good.”

[mrspurs]

Maybe we not talking about TP misses if Roger and Matt show up to play. Maybe...........

[EricB]

Can people around here stop saying BOOK IT.

The only thing that should be booked around here is the posters ;).

fucking idiotic saying.


Are you the forum moderator?




Parker clearly ran out of gas as he was fantastic in the earlier periods. I really feel the perimiter defense in this game was absolutely dreadfull, and it was the complete downfall of the team. Roger Mason's performance was quite worrisome as in his horrible mental error doubling Howard with the shot clock down and leaving Redick open.

[Ice009]

Maybe we not talking about TP misses if Roger and Matt show up to play. Maybe...........

So Matt gets 4 shots and Roger gets 4 shots. How do you explain that? How do they should up when they don't get any shots?

[Shastafarian]

So Matt gets 4 shots and Roger gets 4 shots. How do you explain that? How do they should up when they don't get any shots?

It happens when your point guard takes 22 shots (led the team in shot attempts).

[Dex]

I'll admit that I thought the officiating was pretty crappy last night, but they missed calls on both sides. That's how it goes sometimes.

I still wish Tim Duncan would learn that the refs don't take lightly to being called out.

[z0sa]

Parker had a decent game, but his defense in Nelson both times this season has been ATROCIOUS.

Parker cost us this game if you ask me, missing one gimme which would have changed the entire game (the other floater from the baseline was just a TERRIBLE shot with little chance of going in) and playing horrific defense, whether it was pick and roll D, or isolated, Nelson abused him which is flat out unacceptable. I really hope Pop blasted the shit out of Parker at some point after the game for his mental errors (which included not running the offense properly on a couple possessions).

This team is VERY predictable when Parker is ball hogging many possessions he's out there. Why does Manu create off of one pick generally while Tony needs the ball for 20 seconds and 3-4 screens?

I'm no Tony hater, and generally agree with him taking the most shots and dominating the ball. Last night was not one of those nights, despite a 30+ point performance, since he didn't wrap it up and played horrible Defense.

[kace]

Parker cost us this game if you ask me,
you have to be either a stupid asshole or a Tony hater to say such a thing after this game.

I'm no Tony hater,
oh, well, thank you to make it clear.

[sonic21]

Parker had a decent game, but his defense in Nelson both times this season has been ATROCIOUS.

actually his defense was good during 3 quarters

[sonic21]

Parker cost us this game if you ask me

:sleep

[kace]

actually his defense was good during 3 quarters

Howard scored 24 at 75 % and grabbed 14 rbds (5 offensive). Nelson scored 22 at 39 %, but yes the defense on Nelson was the worse aspect of our overall defense.

[cool hand]

dunk it next time.

[z0sa]

you have to be either a stupid asshole or a Tony hater to say such a thing after this game.

oh, well, thank you to make it clear.

Parker missed two layups on possessions where we HAD to have a score. He drove into the teeth of actually damn good transition defense on the second one and just threw up a reckless teardrop from the baseline, with no chance of a call, a bad angle, and I'm fairly sure the reason he tossed it so high was because it was definitely in blocking distance from Dwight Howard (no DVR sadly).

The first attempt at the rim, which was simply short despite very little defensive pressure, was just sad - plain and simple. Again, I'm no Tony basher, life goes on, but it's a fact he took the W upon himself the last

minute or so and failed miserably.

Sonic21, you give this :sleep and say he played good D for 3 quarters, well the game is 4 quarters son. It was in the fourth quarter Nelson scored 12 and had momentum, and that's when we needed Parker to step it up. He was tired is NO excuse, not with the rest he had. Besides, he certainly had enough energy to drive to the paint and throw up two horrible layup attempts.



I was just thinking, its actually funny the ^quoted poster says what they did, because no matter which way you view it, Parker lost the game for us. Let me presume Kace's stance: Parker is the only reason we were in the game in the first place, and did play pretty good D through the first quarters. It only made sense for him to take the load on his back at the end. He does get to the paint twice but he missed badly on both, and Nelson just went off finally in the fourth.

^ That scenario still means he cost us the game, so in reality, you're only sugar coating it by saying this as opposed to simply saying "Parker cost us the game."

Look, at least we don't have to play Orlando again this season.

[sonic21]

Howard scored 24 at 75 % and grabbed 14 rbds (5 offensive). Nelson scored 22 at 39 %, but yes the defense on Nelson was the worse aspect of our overall defense.

why did you quote me? i was agreeing with you, he played good defense overall except when he was tired at the end.

[Spursone]

:nopeAs much as I love Paker and his game he still is not a CLOSER. Bottom line. When he can be depended upon to close out games consistantly than he will be elevated to another level. :downspin:

[kace]

why did you quote me? i was agreeing with you, he played good defense overall except when he was tired at the end.

i know. i was just agreeing with you and adding that little precision: we are fucked in many games by the opponent's bigs. basically every low post star has been shining against us, not to talk about the help defense from our bigs on outside scorers.

[sonic21]

:nopeAs much as I love Paker and his game he still is not a CLOSER. Bottom line. When he can be depended upon to close out games consistantly than he will be elevated to another level. :downspin:

:lol
he's clutch all season, i knew the hater would jump at the 1st occasion to bash him.

[sonic21]

i know. i was just agreeing with you and adding that little precision: we are fucked in many games by the opponent's bigs. basically every low post star has been shining against us, not to talk about the help defense from our bigs on outside scorers.

ok, my bad

:toast

[HarlemHeat37]

man, some of you are stupid..Tony Parker is clearly a closer, he's been one of the better clutch players all year..

Tony Parker is shooting 57% in clutch time this year..

[Kori Ellis]

:nopeAs much as I love Paker and his game he still is not a CLOSER. Bottom line. When he can be depended upon to close out games consistantly than he will be elevated to another level. :downspin:


Clutch time stats say otherwise.

[Shastafarian]

Tony is clutch. But he's also selfish. I don't know how many times I yell at the TV when he goes up against 2-3 defenders in the paint and misses badly. He definitely should've pulled it back last night on those 2 closing possessions. But he didn't.

[kace]

Tony is clutch. But he's also selfish. I don't know how many times I yell at the TV when he goes up against 2-3 defenders in the paint and misses badly. He definitely should've pulled it back last night on those 2 closing possessions. But he didn't.

do you yell also when our 3 pts shooters are TOTALLY OPEN to take them, making us the best 3 pts team, or can't you understand the link with Parker's penetration's game ?

[z0sa]

do you yell also when our 3 pts shooters are TOTALLY OPEN to take them, making us the best 3 pts team, or can't you understand the link with Parker's penetration's game ?

Tim Duncan has more to do with than Parker. Last night was a prime example of when Tim isn't being doubled, how much harder it is for the Spurs three point shooters to get good looks.

[ClingingMars]

I'll admit that I thought the officiating was pretty crappy last night, but they missed calls on both sides. That's how it goes sometimes.

I still wish Tim Duncan would learn that the refs don't take lightly to being called out.

it was HORRENDOUS for the Spurs. it probably got Duncan so pissed that he had to say somethin'

-Mars

[Shastafarian]

do you yell also when our 3 pts shooters are TOTALLY OPEN to take them, making us the best 3 pts team, or can't you understand the link with Parker's penetration's game ?

Oh I missed the day in basketball camp when us shorter players were taught to challenge 3 big men in the paint. Tony's penetration game does not depend upon him taking shots against much taller defenders.

[birdy219]

I'll admit that I thought the officiating was pretty crappy last night, but they missed calls on both sides. That's how it goes sometimes.

I still wish Tim Duncan would learn that the refs don't take lightly to being called out.

I agree with you, but I disagree with this statement. Phil Jackson calls out the refs all the time and so does Shaq. Timmy usually does not complain to the media, so when he does complain; you can take it to the bank that it was BAD officiating. Maybe he can start going to the line like say Wade. What does Wade average? 15-20 freethrow attempts a game:wow? That would be great for Timmy. Hope springs eternal I know. :p:

[FromWayDowntown]

Do you posters who are questioning Parker or dissatisfied with his play think he should be moved in a trade, and if so, who exactly do you think the Spurs can get that will be better?

It doesn't seem a fair criticism to me to question the fact that Parker takes the most shots on the team when his coach instructs him to shoot the ball aggressively. That he misses shots doesn't make those shots bad ones, either.

Frankly, I just don't get most of the Parker criticism. Without Parker, this team has little-to-no chance to even dream of a title. It's not feasible to think that the Spurs would be able to get a truly better player for Parker in a deal and, frankly, there aren't many guys who play that position who ARE better than Parker in all aspects of the game.

Do you really think that reigning in Parker's aggressiveness or asking him to change as a player will work?

[smeagol]

Do you posters who are questioning Parker or dissatisfied with his play think he should be moved in a trade, and if so, who exactly do you think the Spurs can get that will be better?

It doesn't seem a fair criticism to me to question the fact that Parker takes the most shots on the team when his coach instructs him to shoot the ball aggressively. That he misses shots doesn't make those shots bad ones, either.

Frankly, I just don't get most of the Parker criticism. Without Parker, this team has little-to-no chance to even dream of a title. It's not feasible to think that the Spurs would be able to get a truly better player for Parker in a deal and, frankly, there aren't many guys who play that position who ARE better than Parker in all aspects of the game.

Do you really think that reigning in Parker's aggressiveness or asking him to change as a player will work?

To add to your post:

Parker had an awesome game up until the last two shots, not to mention the fcat he has been carrying the team (together with TD) for a while.

Some people just can't get over the hate . . .

[Nathan Explosion]

Parker missed a quick tear drop, that is true. To say it was a bad shot is not however. The clock is your enemy at this point, and you needed a quick score. Parker had the look. A different angle than normal for sure, but a look is a look.

The layup was tired legs plain and simple. So the guy misses two free throws at the end. That should be canceled out by the Sixers game and the countless others where he's drained big mid range jumpers to keep the opponent at bay in crunch time.

Parker is not a pass first PG because he's not asked to be. Parker is the PG, but Duncan is the QB of the offense. That's by Pop's design.

[z0sa]

Do you posters who are questioning Parker or dissatisfied with his play think he should be moved in a trade, and if so, who exactly do you think the Spurs can get that will be better?

It doesn't seem a fair criticism to me to question the fact that Parker takes the most shots on the team when his coach instructs him to shoot the ball aggressively. That he misses shots doesn't make those shots bad ones, either.

Frankly, I just don't get most of the Parker criticism. Without Parker, this team has little-to-no chance to even dream of a title. It's not feasible to think that the Spurs would be able to get a truly better player for Parker in a deal and, frankly, there aren't many guys who play that position who ARE better than Parker in all aspects of the game.

Do you really think that reigning in Parker's aggressiveness or asking him to change as a player will work?


So it's unfair to critique a player?

Myself, I disagree. Just because many do it out of spite, the actuality is, he missed a gimme and then immediately afterward, took a tough contested teardrop in a similar situation and looked just as foolish. The two shot attempts, in relation to the clock situation, were what we wanted - but he botched them both, and badly. Additionally, the second attempt was a chemistry killer IMO. You don't miss a layup then run back and throw THAT up. This is besides the fact Nelson owned him during the stretch run.

The fact he's had a very good season, and our championship hopes rest more on his sholders than ever, should only be more reason he gets criticized when making mistakes like at the end of last night's contest.

[ducks]

those were not mistakes
pop wanted him to shot them
unfortunally they did not go on
but he drove and was aggressive
had he should jumpshots he would been blasted but he attacked and gets blasted
unreal

if any other spur players missed those shots it would have been ok but not tp

[z0sa]

those were not mistakes
pop wanted him to shot them
unfortunally they did not go on
but he drove and was aggressive
had he should jumpshots he would been blasted but he attacked and gets blasted
unreal

if any other spur players missed those shots it would have been ok but not tp

Pop can't put the ball in the basket for him :sleep

You know what that equals? Two mistakes.

[ducks]

Pop can't put the ball in the basket for him :sleep

You know what that equals? Two mistakes.

no it would have been a mistake had he not shot the shots when that close
and pulled out and tried to pass it to someone else and the other person not looking for the pass thinking he would shot it

[ducks]

Pop can't put the ball in the basket for him :sleep

You know what that equals? Two mistakes.

one could say he was the best player last night

[z0sa]

So the guy misses two free throws at the end. That should be canceled out by the Sixers game and the countless others where he's drained big mid range jumpers to keep the opponent at bay in crunch time.

"What have you done for me lately?" pretty much sums up why games don't get 'cancelled' out because you want them to. A player who did great last game but cost us the victory this one does not get a free pass.

[ducks]

"What have you done for me lately?" pretty much sums up why games don't get 'cancelled' out because you want them to. A player who did great last game but cost us the victory this one does not get a free pass.

so tp was to blame for the spur three point shooters missing
tp shot 50% from downtown

[z0sa]

one could say he was the best player last night

He disappeared in the 4th quarter, on both ends. Tired legs on 3 days of rest at home is no excuse.


one could say he was the best player last night

You make me into a Tony Basher. The reality is, through 3 quarters I was impressed with his play. But the game lasts 4 quarters.

[FromWayDowntown]

Myself, I disagree. Just because many do it out of spite, the actuality is, he missed a gimme and then immediately afterward, took a tough contested teardrop in a similar situation and looked just as foolish. The two shot attempts, in relation to the clock situation, were what we wanted - but he botched them both, and badly. Additionally, the second attempt was a chemistry killer IMO. You don't miss a layup then run back and throw THAT up.

So you don't really have a quarrel with his shot selection except that he missed?

Tony Parker won't be capable of taking this team where it can go because he's not perfect?


The fact he's had a very good season, and our championship hopes rest more on his sholders than ever, should only be more reason he gets criticized when making mistakes like at the end of last night's contest.

Again, if you don't question his shot selection ("The two shot attempts, in relation to the clock situation, were what we wanted - but he botched them both, and badly.") then what exactly is the complaint?

I agree that fair criticism can be warranted, but I think most of the criticism leveled against Parker on this board is basically unfair. Parker's not perfect; no player is. Michael Jordan missed gimmes in crunch time, too, but nobody criticized him for that in the guise of arguing that his shot selection was poor. There are things to complain about with every player on this team, but Tony Parker's shot selection, particularly in light of his shooting percentage, strikes me as a pretty fine nit to pick.

[FromWayDowntown]

It is good to know that the main complaint against Tony Parker around here is that he's just not perfect.

[ducks]

the problem was no one was hitting outside shots to make it easier for tp and duncan

tp carried the team tell the 4 quarter

pop sat duncan to long

tp was not perfect but he was far from the reason spurs lost


pop should play hill,tp, manu, mason more at one time
all 4 could create

[ducks]

duncan was far from perfect against magic

[Shastafarian]

It is good to know that the main complaint against Tony Parker around here is that he's just not perfect.

I think it's out of the desire for a PG in the traditional sense.

WARNING: COMPARISON UPCOMING

Take a look at Chris Paul. He's more of a traditional PG. But he still is shooting 49%. He averages only .9 less points/game than Tony but averages 4.6 more assists. Amazingly he takes 3 less shots per game. Yes he has averaged 4 more minutes per game but those assist numbers are what you really want out of a true PG. Will Tony ever be capable of those type numbers? Maybe. Is it silly to hope for them? Definitely. I've been criticized for saying Tony's shot selection has been subpar but imagine if he could take 3 less shots, average about the same points/game and have just 2 or 3 more assists per game.

[ducks]

I think it's out of the desire for a PG in the traditional sense.

WARNING: COMPARISON UPCOMING

Take a look at Chris Paul. He's more of a traditional PG. But he still is shooting 49%. He averages only .9 less points/game than Tony but averages 4.6 more assists. Amazingly he takes 3 less shots per game. Yes he has averaged 4 more minutes per game but those assist numbers are what you really want out of a true PG. Will Tony ever be capable of those type numbers? Maybe. Is it silly to hope for them? Definitely. I've been criticized for saying Tony's shot selection has been subpar but imagine if he could take 3 less shots, average about the same points/game and have just 2 or 3 more assists per game.

gee lets trade and see if paul has all those assist
when duncan and manu get assist on these spurs team


and lets not change the o

humm paul looses atleast 4 assist a game
and hten looses 2 a game with not having chandler and his dunking ofr those alleyoops

[Shastafarian]

gee lets trade and see if paul has all those assist
when duncan and manu get assist on these spurs team


and lets not change the o

humm paul looses atleast 4 assist a game
and hten looses 2 a game with not having chandler and his dunking ofr those alleyoops

haha ducks never disappoints. Conveniently you left out the 3 less shot attempts and only 0.9 less points/game. This is why I put a warning in there. Comparisons always leave people with sandy vaginas.

[z0sa]

So you don't really have a quarrel with his shot selection except that he missed?

Tony Parker won't be capable of taking this team where it can go because he's not perfect?

I liked the first layup attempt, exactly what we needed, then he missed sickeningly short. He failed hugely and deserves any criticism he gets for that shot.

The second shot, that erratic high arcing tear drop from that weird angle - just a tough, essentially contested shot and just really was a force on all levels.

Again, is it unfair to critique a player?



Again, if you don't question his shot selection ("The two shot attempts, in relation to the clock situation, were what we wanted - but he botched them both, and badly.") then what exactly is the complaint?

I didn't question what the last two shots were, ever. The first attempt was a botch, plain and simple, and he deserves any criticism he gets for missing a point blank uncontested layin with time ticking and the Spurs in a hole. The second attempt was bad shot selection, and he should have kept dribbling to look for a better shot. That simple.

What exactly is the complaint besides those two? His fourth quarter D. His inability to make plays down the stretch. Those two shots were the culmination of a bad fourth quarter.


I agree that fair criticism can be warranted, but I think most of the criticism leveled against Parker on this board is basically unfair.

I regard you as a knowledgeable, level headed poster - you understand the difference between Tony bashing and my criticism. He missed a wide open layup in a desperate situation. Surely you can understand a fellow level headed spurfan to be frustrated with that, at least?


Parker's not perfect; no player is. Michael Jordan missed gimmes in crunch time, too, but nobody criticized him for that in the guise of arguing that his shot selection was poor. There are things to complain about with every player on this team, but Tony Parker's shot selection, particularly in light of his shooting percentage, strikes me as a pretty fine nit to pick.

I have been explicit in my previous posts. They answer the reason I chose a fine "nit" to pick.

[ducks]

pop is forcing to shot that shots

manu is not as good anymore

[ducks]

spurs made players down the stretch spurs gave up big threes late
their d was the problem not o

[Shastafarian]

pop is forcing to shot that shots

manu is not as good anymore

According to whom?

[ducks]

right now
manu is playing 70% of what he has in the past
pop is saying manu is 90%


according to him look at his interview thread

[Shastafarian]

right now
manu is playing 70% of what he has in the past
pop is saying manu is 90%


according to him look at his interview thread

No no no, where did you get "pop is forcing to shot that shots"?

[ducks]

pop tells tp alot to shot 20-25 shots a game
do you not follow the spurs?

[Shastafarian]

pop tells tp alot to shot 20-25 shots a game
do you not follow the spurs?

Can you supply a link to such a quote?

[z0sa]

Can you supply a link to such a quote?

I don't know where but it is a fact. Parker dominates the offense by design.

[ducks]

been posted here several times
in playoffs especially
ask others in here
use the search feature

[Shastafarian]

been posted here several times
in playoffs especially
ask others in here
use the search feature

:lol what should I put into the search? Shots? 20-25? Tony Parker? Popovich?

I remember Pop saying he likes Tony shooting but I don't remember him putting a number on the shot attempts he wants tony taking.

[timvp]

Shastafarian not knowing basic Spurs strategy? Shocking. Must not have been covered at SR . . .

[Kori Ellis]

:lol what should I put into the search? Shots? 20-25? Tony Parker? Popovich?

I remember Pop saying he likes Tony shooting but I don't remember him putting a number on the shot attempts he wants tony taking.

2007 playoffs. He said he wanted him shooting 20-25 shots a game.

I think during the regular season, they like Tony averaging 16-18 shots a game (more depending on the opponent).

[timvp]

So it's unfair to critique a player?

Myself, I disagree. Just because many do it out of spite, the actuality is, he missed a gimme and then immediately afterward, took a tough contested teardrop in a similar situation and looked just as foolish. The two shot attempts, in relation to the clock situation, were what we wanted - but he botched them both, and badly. Additionally, the second attempt was a chemistry killer IMO. You don't miss a layup then run back and throw THAT up. Did you watch the game? The layup came after the floater.

But don't let that stop you. :rolleyes

[raspsa]

I think what makes this unusual is he missed both shot when you would normally expect him to make at least one of them and the misses weren't even close.

[Shastafarian]

Shastafarian not knowing basic Spurs strategy? Shocking. Must not have been covered at SR . . .

Basic Spurs strategy is for Tony to shoot 20-25 times a game? Then why does he average 17? I get it that you spend a lot of time analyzing the Spurs. But I don't think it's requisite for you to be such a prick.

[Shastafarian]

2007 playoffs. He said he wanted him shooting 20-25 shots a game.

I think during the regular season, they like Tony averaging 16-18 shots a game (more depending on the opponent).

See that sounds more realistic considering he's averaging 17 shots a game.

[Kori Ellis]

See that sounds more realistic considering he's averaging 17 shots a game.

Yeah, but they don't mind him shooting 20+ times a game when he's exposing an opponent and shooting well over 50 percent in a game. Pop doesn't like Tony to not shoot. It's part of the Spurs game plan for him to have the most shot attempts. They are playing to their strengths.

There are some games when Tony forces this and gets tunnel vision. These are rare compared to a few years back. But when you are a scoring point guard, it's hard to find a balance - particularly in games when the 3-point shooters have gone dry or they can't get free. Those are times when Tony needs to relentlessly continue to try to score.

Last night, the Magic D was all over the Spurs 3-point shooters. So, it was part of the game plan for Tony to continue trying to get to the rack. Unfortunately, he missed two chip shots that he would normally make. I get the Tony criticism sometimes - he's not perfect, no one is. However, those last two shots were what the Spurs wanted. They were behind by multiple possessions with less than a minute to go. They wanted quick baskets near the rim. The shot from the angle wasn't a perfect opportunity, but it wasn't horrible - it was a fastbreak and the Spurs were trying to go quick. The layup, he just didn't get enough on it and it was short. Looked like he didn't have enough legs. But oh well, things happen.

The Spurs' bad perimeter D and the Magic's good perimeter D are why the Spurs lost the game... not Tony Parker. But hopefully Tony blames himself and fuckin destroys the Lakers on Wednesday. :toast

[z0sa]

Did you watch the game? The layup came after the floater.

But don't let that stop you. :rolleyes

Did you? I don't have a DVR but I would bet money on the wide open layup being before the baseline tear drop. EDIT: I haven't seen again myself, apparently I was wrong. Changes very little besides however much cash I'd have bet :depressed

Nice little quip there. 'Don't let it stop you,' with the little rolls eyes emoticon. How original, how thought provoking. You don't even contribute anything with that but come off lookin' real cool. Good one. You should've used :hat afterwards to really show how badass you came off there. Damn that was cool.

[Shastafarian]

Yeah, but they don't mind him shooting 20+ times a game when he's exposing an opponent and shooting well over 50 percent in a game. Pop doesn't like Tony to not shoot. It's part of the Spurs game plan for him to have the most shot attempts. They are playing to their strengths.

There are some games when Tony forces this and gets tunnel vision. These are rare compared to a few years back. But when you are a scoring point guard, it's hard to find a balance - particularly in games when the 3-point shooters have gone dry or they can't get free. Those are times when Tony needs to relentlessly continue to try to score.I completely agree. I love it when Tony is shooting well. Him driving to the basket and making open layups is probably the most important part to the Spurs offensive scheme. But I can't stand it when he goes to lane, doesn't look to pass, and takes a contested layup.


Last night, the Magic D was all over the Spurs 3-point shooters. So, it was part of the game plan for Tony to continue trying to get to the rack. Unfortunately, he missed two chip shots that he would normally make. I get the Tony criticism sometimes - he's not perfect, no one is. However, those last two shots were what the Spurs wanted. They were behind by multiple possessions with less than a minute to go. They wanted quick baskets near the rim. The shot from the angle wasn't a perfect opportunity, but it wasn't horrible - it was a fastbreak and the Spurs were trying to go quick. The layup, he just didn't get enough on it and it was short. Looked like he didn't have enough legs. But oh well, things happen. I agree on all this except for the tear drop being the shot they wanted. There was about 53 seconds left and they were down by 4 right? Maybe I'm wrong but he was outnumbered down low. It was a close range shot but I still think you have enough time to bring it back out, make a quick pass to Tim or Manu (or even reset and drive again). Shots that are rushed have a lower success rate I would think.


The Spurs' bad perimeter D and the Magic's good perimeter D are why the Spurs lost the game... not Tony Parker. But hopefully Tony blames himself and fuckin destroys the Lakers on Wednesday. :toast
Agreed. I'm gonna be keeping a log of Tony's questionable shot selection for your husband :toast

[Shastafarian]

Did you? I don't have a DVR but I would bet money on the wide open layup being before the baseline tear drop.
.

No the tear drop came before the layup.

[z0sa]

No the tear drop came before the layup.

My bad. It's times like this I wish I had some cash for something other than basic cable.

[gilmor]

My bad. It's times like this I wish I had some cash for something other than basic cable.

Why must u crucify him on the last 2 plays when he is the only one bringing Spurs close with Magic for most of the 3 quarters?

Any player will screw up the last-minute plays that's how the game is being played.. and that player includes Kobe, even Tim and Manu

[z0sa]

Why must u crucify him on the last 2 plays when he is the only one bringing Spurs close with Magic for most of the 3 quarters?

Any player will screw up the last-minute plays that's how the game is being played.. and that player includes Kobe, even Tim and Manu

Whose crucifying him? Point out where I've ever been against Parker. This is probably the first time I've ever called him out, and it was for this small sample I'm calling him out, nothing more.

You say he's the only reason we were close, well I went over that in this same thread. The game is 4 quarters, not 3, not 3.5, not 3.9, but 4.

[ducks]

when tp takes a contested layup
is that better then someone else takign a contested jumpshot

[Brazil]

when tp takes a contested layup
is that better then someone else takign a contested jumpshot

exactly

[it's me]

2007 playoffs. He said he wanted him shooting 20-25 shots a game.

I think during the regular season, they like Tony averaging 16-18 shots a game (more depending on the opponent).


Well, that made a lot of sense then… Cavaliers didn’t even try to guard Tony, they didn’t even have a real PG… but now??? To me is not the number of shoots but the quality and timing…. Problem is when a PG is SOMETIMES just looking for his own shoot and passing the ball to the open man becomes the second or even third option.

Anyways… I’ll be labeled as a Tony hater…. I know…

[mathbzh]

I think it's out of the desire for a PG in the traditional sense.

WARNING: COMPARISON UPCOMING

Take a look at Chris Paul. He's more of a traditional PG. But he still is shooting 49%. He averages only .9 less points/game than Tony but averages 4.6 more assists. Amazingly he takes 3 less shots per game. Yes he has averaged 4 more minutes per game but those assist numbers are what you really want out of a true PG. Will Tony ever be capable of those type numbers? Maybe. Is it silly to hope for them? Definitely. I've been criticized for saying Tony's shot selection has been subpar but imagine if he could take 3 less shots, average about the same points/game and have just 2 or 3 more assists per game.


Always the same example.
It is unfair, Chris Paul is a TOP 5 player in this league and a MVP candidate. Do you bash Ginobili because he don't have Kobe or Wade numbers?

Moreover, Paul is the centerpiece of the Hornets offense. Do you want to ask Duncan to change his game, to become a finisher only waiting for Parker creation? Do you want Manu to become a "catch and shoot" player?

Can you explain me why with the best passer in the league the Hornets are just an average passing team:
- 57% of assisted FG, 59% for the Spurs
- #11 in Hollinger (not exactly a Spurs fan) assist stats when the Spurs are #2.
- 20 apg, Spurs 22


To finish, what make you believe tony could make 2/3 less shots and score the same points/game? Tony is a 50% scorer... Why do you think his shot selection is poor? How is he suppose to know which shots he will miss?
Do you realise, he would be a 57% to 61% scorer with 2-3 shot less and the same points? Only centers can score like that.

[Shastafarian]

Always the same example.
It is unfair, Chris Paul is a TOP 5 player in this league and a MVP candidate. Do you bash Ginobili because he don't have Kobe or Wade numbers? I missed the part where I was "bashing" anyone.


Moreover, Paul is the centerpiece of the Hornets offense.According to people here Tony is the centerpiece of our offense.

Do you want to ask Duncan to change his game, to become a finisher only waiting for Parker creation? Do you want Manu to become a "catch and shoot" player?Please re-read my post.


Can you explain me why with the best passer in the league the Hornets are just an average passing team:
- 57% of assisted FG, 59% for the Spurs
- #11 in Hollinger (not exactly a Spurs fan) assist stats when the Spurs are #2.
- 20 apg, Spurs 22...why does this matter?



To finish, what make you believe tony could make 2/3 less shots and score the same points/game?Because other players can. And again, re-read my post.

Tony is a 50% scorer... Why do you think his shot selection is poor? I wonder if you realize you answered your own question.

How is he suppose to know which shots he will miss?Are you joking? Shot selection is not knowing "which shots you will miss".

Do you realise, he would be a 57% to 61% scorer with 2-3 shot less and the same points? Only centers can score like that.
Or guys named Chris Paul? Gimme a break.

[mathbzh]

I missed the part where I was "bashing" anyone.
Ok, I trust you about that. I hope you will admit it is not fair to compare Tony with the best PG in the league.


According to people here Tony is the centerpiece of our offense.
Please re-read my post.
Not like Paul.



...why does this matter?

It matters because basketball is a team game. The Spurs are already a good passing team so we don't have much room to improve there. If Parker increase is apg according to your wish (i.e. 2 or 3 more APG...) he will probably steal them from the rest of the team. New Orleans average passing despite Paul presence illustrate that very well.


Because other players can. And again, re-read my post.
Once again: the best PG in the league.
Tony has a better FG% than Paul. Paul takes more 3 pointer. Do you want Tony to shoot more 3? And more important: he has 2 more FT per game.
Conclusion: Paul shot selection is not better that Tony Parker.



I wonder if you realize you answered your own question.
Yes I did, Tony is #2 in FG% among PG, his shot selection is not good, it is elite.


Are you joking? Shot selection is not knowing "which shots you will miss".
When a guard shots 50%, his shot selection is good... he can't improve without foreseeing which shots he will miss.


Or guys named Chris Paul? Gimme a break.
No even the great Chris Paul can't shot that well. And if Tp shot more 3pt and more FT it will not improve his assists total.

[hater]

Nelson is Parker's daddy

[Shastafarian]

Ok, I trust you about that. I hope you will admit it is not fair to compare Tony with the best PG in the league.Is Tony not top 5? This is also why I included a warning. If you read the end of my post you see I say it's silly to hope for those numbers.




It matters because basketball is a team game. The Spurs are already a good passing team so we don't have much room to improve there. If Parker increase is apg according to your wish (i.e. 2 or 3 more APG...) he will probably steal them from the rest of the team. New Orleans average passing despite Paul presence illustrate that very well.This is my point though. If he takes 2-3 fewer shots, that could mean more assists. That won't be taking assists from other players.




Tony has a better FG% than Paul.barely

Paul takes more 3 pointer.Because he has that range

Do you want Tony to shoot more 3?No

And more important: he has 2 more FT per game. Ok so he would average 2 less points.

Conclusion: Paul shot selection is not better that Tony Parker.Never said it was.




Yes I did, Tony is #2 in FG% among PG, his shot selection is not good, it is elite.FG% is associated with good shot selection. There's probably a very strong correlation. But it doesn't mean a player has excellent shot selection. Tony is fortunate enough to have blazing speed and a decent jump shot. Those mean he gets easy shots and hits open jumpers.



When a guard shots 50%, his shot selection is good... he can't improve without foreseeing which shots he will miss.Not true. Though I guess he should be able to foresee that going for a layup with a center near the basket is probably not gonna end well.



No even the great Chris Paul can'tPaul doesn't shoot the % no. He does take less shots and average about the same points and 4 more assists.