McDonald: Parker Takes Shot At Greatness

[duncan228]

Parker takes shot at greatness (http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/Parker_takes_shot_at_greatness.html)
Jeff McDonald

On a recent Friday morning that could pass for any other morning, Tony Parker is hard at work, lofting up practice jumpers.

Some go in. Some skip off the rim. Parker's expression never changes: Eyes focused, tongue wagging from the left side of his mouth, a portrait in concentration.

Here on the Spurs' practice court, the benefit isn't in the outcome. It is in the action.

“Repetition, repetition, repetition,” Parker said. “That's the key.”

Catch, shoot, repeat. This has been Parker's routine for the past four years.

His jump shot, he says, “is always a work in progress.”

In his eighth season since entering the league as little more than a French layup machine, Parker has built up an accompanying mid-range game that makes him, in the words of one rival coach, “almost impossible to guard.”

The proof is in the numbers. Parker, 26, has just completed his finest NBA season, setting career marks in scoring (22 points per game) and assists (6.9 per game) while shooting 50.6 percent from the field.

He stands as Exhibit 1A of how the Spurs were able to survive nagging injuries to Tim Duncan and a season-ending one to Manu Ginobili to claim primacy in the NBA's most rugged division.

“It's been his best year,” Spurs coach Gregg Popovich said of his All-Star point guard. “He's carried us.”

Next up: The playoffs, where Parker's ability to outmaneuver Dallas counterpart Jason Kidd will go a long way toward determining the Spurs' first-round fate.

The series, which opens Saturday at the AT&T Center, will mark Parker's first postseason meeting with Kidd since the 2003 Finals. Though the Spurs beat New Jersey in six games that year, the series did not go so well for Parker. That offseason, the Spurs tried to replace him — with Kidd.

That Parker, however, is not this Parker.

His ascent from teenage prodigy to arguably the planet's best point guard not named Chris Paul began four summers ago.

In June of 2005, days after winning his second NBA title, Parker was summoned to Popovich's office for the traditional season-ending exit meeting. He left with explicit marching orders.

“He said for me to get to the next level, I had to work on my jump shot,” Parker said.

Blessed with superhuman quickness, Parker had always been a one-trick pony. Although he was awfully good at that trick — zip to the basket, shoot a layup — teams had begun to back off him and force him to shoot jumpers.

That presented a problem. As a jump shooter, Parker couldn't throw a croissant in the Seine.

“You could just give him jump shots,” said New Orleans coach Byron Scott, who coached the Nets in the 2003 Finals. “Everybody in the league respects his quickness. You wanted him to shoot jump shots from 18 feet out.”

Parker's career arc changed in the summer of 2005, when the Spurs lured 44-year-old assistant Chip Engelland from Denver.

Engelland had gained a league-wide reputation as a sort of shooting shaman, in part due to his work with Grant Hill and former Spurs sharpshooter Steve Kerr. Parker would be his latest project.

“He wanted to get better,” Engelland said. “That was step 1.”

In the mission to remake Parker's shooting stroke, the pair drew inspiration from an unlikely source.

Parker had read how Tiger Woods, at the top of his game, had decided to break down and rebuild his golf swing. Parker could relate.

“If it's good enough for Tiger,” Parker said, “it's good enough for me.”

The first season after working with Engelland, Parker averaged 18.9 points and made his first All-Star team. In three of the past four seasons, Parker shot better than 50 percent.

“His experience has caught up to his technique,” said Engelland, who still oversees most of Parker's shooting sessions. “It carries over now, from the practice tee to the games.”

In the past four seasons, Parker has made three All-Star teams and earned one Finals MVP trophy. In the weeks to come, he is likely to earn his first All-NBA mention.

He has little left to prove.

And yet, the practice jumpers keep going up. Some go in. Some go out. Just being there, working on a work in constant progress, is what counts.

“Tony wants to be great,” Engelland said. “He doesn't know what his limits are.”

[spursfan09]

Atta Boy Tony!!!! Keep it up.

:lobt2:

and Bring on Jason Kidd

:hungry:

[raspsa]

The playoffs and finals are where reputations are made.

[SenorSpur]

The series, which opens Saturday at the AT&T Center, will mark Parker's first postseason meeting with Kidd since the 2003 Finals. Though the Spurs beat New Jersey in six games that year, the series did not go so well for Parker. That offseason, the Spurs tried to replace him — with Kidd.

Exhibit A as to what little patience or tolerance Pop has for young players. Had Kidd accepted the Spurs advances, there's no doubt that Tony ass would've been shipped outta here in some sign-n-trade scenario.

The point that kills me is that even during that 2003 series with the Nets, as inconsistent of a shooter as Tony was at the time, he was still a better shooter than Kidd. So basically, the Spurs were chasing a superiorly-talented, pass-first PG, who couldn't shoot better than the younger PG they drafted and were trying to ship out. That whole flirtation with Kidd made absolutely no sense at all then. Makes even less sense now.

Now is there any question of who the better point guard is today? Sometimes the best moves are the ones you don't make.

[SPURSGOAT]

His ascent from teenage prodigy to arguably the planet's best point guard not named Chris Paul began four summers ago.

FUCK Chris Paul!

TP > CP3

[SPURSGOAT]

Great read! Can't wait to see Parker run circles around Kidd.

[024]

as much as parker has progressed since entering the league, he still has one more step - establishing himself as an undisputed superstar. usually this can be achieved through winning a mvp or multiple all-nba/all-star selections but it can also be achieved through the playoffs. without ginobili, parker's ability to carry a team will be even more visible. optimistically, here is the chance for parker to put himself in the company of the elites. not just the point guard elite, but among the top ten or so players in the NBA.

lebron, wade, kobe, paul, duncan, dirk, pierce... parker?

[Sean Higgins]

parker reminds me of a younger malik allen

[Bukefal]

This guy is just great, he has been doing brilliant this season and all seasons before. TP is the best pg in the league and the superstar of the spurs team. Especially this season there is alot of pressure on TP, heading into the playoffs, but im confident he can handle that pressure.

GO TOny, you are simply the best! Bring the glory to SA.

[Bukefal]

as much as parker has progressed since entering the league, he still has one more step - establishing himself as an undisputed superstar.?

I think in the eyes of most of americans, that is impossible, 1. because he is french (believe it or not, that's a big factor why he isnt getting the deserved respect) and 2. if it happens, it will take alot of time.

Anyway, in my eyes he already is an undisputed Superstar! :king

[romain.star]

I think in the eyes of most of americans, that is impossible, 1. because he is french (believe it or not, that's a big factor why he isnt getting the deserved respect) and 2. if it happens, it will take alot of time.

Anyway, in my eyes he already is an undisputed Superstar! :king

it reminds me the "White men can't jump" movie

[Rogue]

FUCK Chris Paul!

TP > CP3
ego beats reasonality sometimes.

[Samr]

Some go in. Some skip off the rim. Parker's expression never changes: Eyes focused, tongue wagging from the left side of his mouth, a portrait in concentration.

You know not to nitpick or anything, but the accompanying picture to that in the newspaper has his tongue out of the right side of his mouth.

[GSH]

Exhibit A as to what little patience or tolerance Pop has for young players. Had Kidd accepted the Spurs advances, there's no doubt that Tony ass would've been shipped outta here in some sign-n-trade scenario.

The point that kills me is that even during that 2003 series with the Nets, as inconsistent of a shooter as Tony was at the time, he was still a better shooter than Kidd. So basically, the Spurs were chasing a superiorly-talented, pass-first PG, who couldn't shoot better than the younger PG they drafted and were trying to ship out. That whole flirtation with Kidd made absolutely no sense at all then. Makes even less sense now.

Now is there any question of who the better point guard is today? Sometimes the best moves are the ones you don't make.

I agree with you on most things, including the last part of this post. Not so much the first. I don't think it was quite so cut and dried, back in 2003. Kidd had averaged almost twice the assists and rebounds as Parker, almost 3 times the number of steals per game, and 18 PPG compared to Parker's 15.5 PPG. Kidd took a lot more 3-pointers with the Nets that year, which drug down his overall FG%, but overall their 2P shooting percentages weren't that far off each other. At that point in time, Kidd was a lot better PG than Parker. And don't forget, if the Spurs had signed Kidd and traded Parker, the Spurs probably would have kept Leandro Barbosa as his backup.

That being said, all those extra rebounds Kidd gets probably wouldn't happen in Pop's 1-2-3-back system. And the steals would have suffered, too, since Pop doesn't tolerate too much gambling on defense. Even his assist count would have probably suffered from the 4-down. So even though Kidd looked better on paper, I'm not sure that all of his plus side would have translated to the Spurs system.

I don't think it would have been a good trade to make, but I can understand why they looked at that point in time. If nothing else, it lit a fire under Tony Parker's ass. And that may have been the biggest point of the whole exercise.

[McMofo]

Atta Boy Tony!!!! Keep it up.

That's was Eva said.

[SenorSpur]

At that point in time, Kidd was a lot better PG than Parker. And don't forget, if the Spurs had signed Kidd and traded Parker, the Spurs probably would have kept Leandro Barbosa as his backup.

There's no disputing the fact that Kidd was definitely the better PG at that time. Though I stand by my claim of Parker being the better shooter. After all, back then he was taking many more 3-pointers that he does not, and not hitting them successfully. So you could make the claim that Parker's FG% was inhibited by the too.

The point I wanted to make is this is yet another example of Pop being so impatient and intolerant of young players that he was ready to ship Parker's ass outta here before he had a chance to flourish. It's a GM's responsibility to keep an eye on the TOMORROW, as well as the TODAY. I guarantee the Spurs would look a helluva lot different with Kidd here, along with his 20 mil salary and declining skills, and Tony flourishing someplace else. George Hill almost met the same fate in the proposed Marcus Camby trade. Thankfully, he didn't get traded and look what happened. Spurs got an early Xmas gift in Drew Gooden. Proving yet again, sometimes the best moves are the ones you don't make.

[YoMamaIsCallin]

Like they say, hindsight is 20-20. It's really just lame to rifle-shot specific actions in the past that have turned out one way or the other, and people who do that are just sideline critics, not anyone who understands what making a decision really means.

You decide based on the best knowledge and judgement you have at the time.

You say sometimes the best move is the one that's not taken? In the real world, much more often than that, it's inaction that kills you.

To get specific: I believe there's no question that trading for Kidd would have been the right thing to do, AT THE TIME, and I was a big advocate for it. We have no idea how well that team would have done, but I would have loved to have seen Kidd and Duncan together. Duncan knows how to get to the right spot and he can catch and produce on any kind of pass, and Kidd certainly knows how to get there.

[anonoftheinternets]

There's no disputing the fact that Kidd was definitely the better PG at that time. Though I stand by my claim of Parker being the better shooter. After all, back then he was taking many more 3-pointers that he does not, and not hitting them successfully. So you could make the claim that Parker's FG% was inhibited by the too.

The point I wanted to make is this is yet another example of Pop being so impatient and intolerant of young players that he was ready to ship Parker's ass outta here before he had a chance to flourish. It's a GM's responsibility to keep an eye on the TOMORROW, as well as the TODAY. I guarantee the Spurs would look a helluva lot different with Kidd here, along with his 20 mil salary and declining skills, and Tony flourishing someplace else. George Hill almost met the same fate in the proposed Marcus Camby trade. Thankfully, he didn't get traded and look what happened. Spurs got an early Xmas gift in Drew Gooden. Proving yet again, sometimes the best moves are the ones you don't make.

wow, ur prob the best "hindsighted" GM I have ever seen. At that time it might have been a good trade. Who knew parker would turn out to be the superstar we have now. It appears u are using this as an example to point out how pop has a low tolerance for point guards. How about quoting the Beno Udrih example instead? Selectively using examples to make our points arent we? Basically its hit and miss, and overall I think Pop has done a great job at finding "diamonds" in the rough.

[SenorSpur]

wow, ur prob the best "hindsighted" GM I have ever seen. At that time it might have been a good trade. Who knew parker would turn out to be the superstar we have now. It appears u are using this as an example to point out how pop has a low tolerance for point guards. How about quoting the Beno Udrih example instead? Selectively using examples to make our points arent we? Basically its hit and miss, and overall I think Pop has done a great job at finding "diamonds" in the rough.

Don't be delusional. Having the benefit of hindsight is not the point. The point is the exploring such a trade made no sense to me, even then. I'm not sitting here claiming that it was obvious that Tony would be a superstar either. What I am saying is that, while he needed to improve his shooting to become a complete player, there was enough evidence there to indicate Tony had a huge upside. Such that you had to ride out his development stage. By that time, he had shown enough that you just don't give him up the way Dallas did with Devin Harris last season.

At the time, Parker was 21 years old. You don't give up a promising young player, who has demonstrated great potential, to saddle your franchise with a great player, whose career arrow had leveled and was going nowhere else but South. The financial reasons alone made it a terrible idea. Kidd's hellacious contract that would've likely meant getting rid of both Parker and Manu. Surely, you don't think an astute GM like Rod Thorn was going to simply let Kidd walk without doing a sign-n-trade? That trade would have been an absolute albortross for the franchise. It doesn't take a genius to see that.

No one is claiming that Pop has done a terrible job, but like everyone else, he has his flaws. His resistance and low tolerance with young talent is obvious. He's a championship coach, but he's not above criticism.

[antgomez2009]

parker is undoubtedly one of the best PGs in the game right now.. He has proggressed and will continue to do so until he cant no more. I hope he stays a Spur for life and becomes the face of the Organization after Timmys time is up!...GO Spurs Go.....Tony for first round MVP!!!!:lobt::flag:

[manufan10]

That's was Eva said.

:lol

[ElNono]

FUCK Chris Paul!

TP > CP3

TP needs to improve his flopping skills considerably in order to catch up with CP3... :wakeup

[GSH]

There's no disputing the fact that Kidd was definitely the better PG at that time. Though I stand by my claim of Parker being the better shooter. After all, back then he was taking many more 3-pointers that he does not, and not hitting them successfully. So you could make the claim that Parker's FG% was inhibited by the too.

The point I wanted to make is this is yet another example of Pop being so impatient and intolerant of young players that he was ready to ship Parker's ass outta here before he had a chance to flourish. It's a GM's responsibility to keep an eye on the TOMORROW, as well as the TODAY. I guarantee the Spurs would look a helluva lot different with Kidd here, along with his 20 mil salary and declining skills, and Tony flourishing someplace else. George Hill almost met the same fate in the proposed Marcus Camby trade. Thankfully, he didn't get traded and look what happened. Spurs got an early Xmas gift in Drew Gooden. Proving yet again, sometimes the best moves are the ones you don't make.


Like I said, I agree with you on most things - including this. Most of the time, I've been on the side that says Pop doesn't do enough to develop young talent. But after that last game in New Orleans, I had to stop and say, "Okay... there's a lot to be said for experienced players." I don't think many young players would have had the patience or the stomach for that last play.

I agree with you about Pop not developing young players. But I have to be honest... that probably makes us both wrong. It's hard to throw too many bricks when the strategy keeps working year after year. We could try and argue that the Spurs could have been even better, if Pop did things differently. But face it - Championships and WCF trips? There's not much room for improvement in that.

But with Manu out and Tim hurting, Tony has carried this team like few other players in the league could have. Kidd may have been good for 2-3 years, but we wouldn't have made the playoffs this year if we had him and not Parker. Something to be said for our side, too.

[Yuixafun]

Exhibit A as to what little patience or tolerance Pop has for young players. Had Kidd accepted the Spurs advances, there's no doubt that Tony ass would've been shipped outta here in some sign-n-trade scenario.

The point that kills me is that even during that 2003 series with the Nets, as inconsistent of a shooter as Tony was at the time, he was still a better shooter than Kidd. So basically, the Spurs were chasing a superiorly-talented, pass-first PG, who couldn't shoot better than the younger PG they drafted and were trying to ship out. That whole flirtation with Kidd made absolutely no sense at all then. Makes even less sense now.

Now is there any question of who the better point guard is today? Sometimes the best moves are the ones you don't make.

It's called competition. You can feel threatened, or take a deep breath and go out there and get better.

You coddle too much. Would Tony have felt so pressed to improve his game if that scenario had not happened?

Pipes break or diamonds are made.

Sometimes players need incentive to keep pushing and some have that drive from within. I think Tony just needed to be reminded.

Tony responded the best way he could.