Does Tony Parker Hurt these Spurs? Inside the Numbers

[timvp]

Heading into this season, many Spurs fans were talking about the reins being handed over from Tim Duncan to Tony Parker. However, after a slew of injuries combined with relatively poor play, a vocal minority of Spurs fans are talking quite differently: Are these Spurs better without Tony Parker?

The theory goes that since Parker is a scoring point guard, his skillset no longer meshes well with the more well-rounded roster, thus the Spurs are better with a more passive, defensive-minded player like George Hill running point guard and Manu Ginobili orchestrating the show.

I compared the numbers from the 26 games Parker has missed this season to the 50 games Parker has played in to see what the statistics have to say on this matter.


http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/3931/tp1ys.jpg

I'm honestly surprised the numbers are so close. Subjectively, the Spurs play a different brand of basketball without Parker. But statistically speaking, there really isn't much of a difference. With Parker, the Spurs have outscored the opponents by 5.49 points per 100 possessions. Without Parker, that number drops to 5.31.

Looking at those numbers, it isn't fair to say Parker has hurt the Spurs this season. It is fair, however, to say that Parker hasn't been much more of an asset this season than what San Antonio is getting from George Hill.

If you compare the Parker's advanced stats to Hill's advanced stats, the case against Parker becomes even more difficult to make.


http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/2905/tp2x.jpg

Overall, these number reinforce a few points. First of all, Hill should be commended for the job he has done filling in for Parker. He's had big shoes to fill and has done about as well as possible. The dropoff from Parker to Hill this season has been minimal. That said, if a constantly injured shell of what was supposed to be Tony Parker helped this team, I'm excited to see how much Parker can help once he's actually playing well.

[Sisk]

That said, if a constantly injured shell of what was supposed to be Tony Parker helped this team, I'm excited to see how much Parker can help once he's actually playing well.

This is what people seem to be forgetting about TP. He was never really healthy all season, and George allowed him to be rested for a few extra games because we were still playing well. A healthy Tony will be much improved over a 70% Tony

[DesignatedT]

Also, the whole team has come a long way since the beginning of the season. RJ, Dice, and especially Manu are all playing at a much higher level then they were in the beginning of the season.

[TD 21]

No disrespect to Hill, but if an injured Parker put up similar numbers to Hill, then what does it tell you about the type of player Parker is (and the gap that still exists between the two) when Parker is 100% healthy?

All this debating about the guards, who should start, chemistry, etc. is over analyzing. When healthy, the Spurs easily have the best back court in the league and the reality is the Spurs were beginning to look how they do now just before Parker was injured, it's not like they magically started to look better the instant he went down.

[mogrovejo]

Tony Parker's presence may hurt the Spurs versus the Lakers. The matchup is tougher for LAL without Parker.

[DesignatedT]

No disrespect to Hill, but if an injured Parker put up similar numbers to Hill, then what does it tell you about the type of player Parker is (and the gap that still exists between the two) when Parker is 100% healthy?

All this debating about the guards, who should start, chemistry, etc. is over analyzing. When healthy, the Spurs easily have the best back court in the league and the reality is the Spurs were beginning to look how they do now just before Parker was injured, it's not like they magically started to look better the instant he went down.

Agreed. Im glad hes coming back tonight though because when any player misses a month worth of games it's going to take some adjusting to.. Glad were able to do that before the playoffs start.

[Sisk]

Tony Parker's presence may hurt the Spurs versus the Lakers. The matchup is tougher for LAL without Parker.

You'll have to elaborate on this one...

TP torches fish

[spursbird]

Hope Parker be the Parker of last season. Then we have great hope to win the title.

[raspsa]

Looking at the stats,the question begging to be asked is this: If Parker is considered to be such a big cog of the Spurs. how come his extended absence doesn't seem to have had a detrimental impact on the team? Stats are essentially the same with or without him so does this bolster the argument that he's expendable and maybe the Spurs could find a replacement who might have a bigger impact? Maybe a true pass-first, defensive PG with a true 3-point shot?
Or is it a case that Manu is simply playing out of his mind in Tony's absence and he won't be able to sustain this level of play without breaking down eventually so Tony's return is just what the Spurs need?

[Crazymaddopeyo]

Question, and this has probably been asked already and I just missed it.

Does anyone know how Parker's other injuries are?

[phyzik]

Tony Parker's presence may hurt the Spurs versus the Lakers. The matchup is tougher for LAL without Parker.

Thats totally inaccurate.

Parker is a huge asset against the Lakers, especially with Fisher still in the starting role.

His quickness will help against their bigs. Get a healthy slashing Parker and resurgant Ginobilli on the floor at the same time??...... damn.... :wow

[DesignatedT]

Looking at the stats,the question begging to be asked is this: If Parker is considered to be such a big cog of the Spurs. how come his extended absence doesn't seem to have had a detrimental impact on the team? Stats are essentially the same with or without him so does this bolster the argument that he's expendable and maybe the Spurs could find a replacement who might have a bigger impact? Maybe a true pass-first, defensive PG with a true 3-point shot?
Or is it a case that Manu is simply playing out of his mind in Tony's absence and he won't be able to sustain this level of play without breaking down eventually so Tony's return is just what the Spurs need?

Exactly. Manu is arguably playing the best basketball of his entire career at the moment. No doubt he has kept this team afloat and he deserves credit for it. There is not one person who thought Manu could be this good still... It's pretty amazing. Saying that... How long will he be able to hold up playing like this... We already know he can't play a whole season at that level. Tony coming back will be able to give Tim and Manu much needed rest without the team going into meltdown mode on the court.

[mogrovejo]

You'll have to elaborate on this one...

TP torches fish

Everybody does. Parker should torch Fish a lot more than he does. But essentially, Ginobili can torch the Lakers overall more than Parker.

[HarlemHeat37]

-Like timvp said, Parker didn't hurt the team, like some people have suggested..he was still an asset on the floor and the Spurs' best lineups this season have involved Parker..Tony was having an off year, his injuries clearly affected him, so I think that speaks more on the poor play of our other key players earlier in the season..

-Manu is a completely different player than he was earlier in the season..he was admittedly struggling with confidence issues and was lacking the explosiveness we're seeing right now..his jump shot was also struggling..

Manu's improvement really has nothing to do with Parker being out at all..better stats due to more touches? yes..improvement in his game? no, nothing to do with it..

-Jefferson has played much better as well..this one could be related to Parker in a way, but Jefferson's assisted % has only gone up by 2% during this time IIRC..he's calling his own number more often, he's rebounding more, he's playing aggressively, and he's defending a lot better..this one has more to do with chemistry and the fact that he needed to step up with TP being out..

-The Spurs were finding a rhythm before TP was injured, winning their last 5 games with Tony in the lineup, all against quality teams..


The key is going to be Pop finding a balance between Parker and Ginobili's touches, while keeping Jefferson involved and keeping him in an aggressive mind state..the Parker-Ginobili part shouldn't be difficult at all since they have won 3 titles together and know each other extremely well, but the RJ part should be interesting..

Another key is that George Hill has to stay aggressive..Hill used to constantly go soft when Manu was on the floor last year and earlier in the season, deferring his entire game to Manu..this season, he's learned to keep his aggressiveness high when Manu is on the floor..he needs to do the same with TP on the floor too..

[DesignatedT]

Everybody does. Parker should torch Fish a lot more than he does. But essentially, Ginobili can torch the Lakers overall more than Parker.

The both of them can't torch them together i guess?

[DesignatedT]

I touched on this in the MANY Parker hate threads..ridiculous how many there are..

-Like timvp said, Parker didn't hurt the team, like some people have suggested..he was still an asset on the floor and the Spurs' best lineups this season have involved Parker..Tony was having an off year, his injuries clearly affected him, so I think that speaks more on the poor play of our other key players earlier in the season..

-Manu is a completely different player than he was earlier in the season..he was admittedly struggling with confidence issues and was lacking the explosiveness we're seeing right now..his jump shot was also struggling..

Manu's improvement really has nothing to do with Parker being out at all..better stats due to more touches? yes..improvement in his game? no, nothing to do with it..

-Jefferson has played much better as well..this one could be related to Parker in a way, but Jefferson's assisted % has only gone up by 2% during this time IIRC..he's calling his own number more often, he's rebounding more, he's playing aggressively, and he's defending a lot better..this one has more to do with chemistry and the fact that he needed to step up with TP being out..

-The Spurs were finding a rhythm before TP was injured, winning their last 5 games with Tony in the lineup, all against quality teams..


The key is going to be Pop finding a balance between Parker and Ginobili's touches, while keeping Jefferson involved and keeping him in an aggressive mind state..

that pretty much sums everything up

Can't believe how much Parker hate is on this board.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

That said, if a constantly injured shell of what was supposed to be Tony Parker helped this team, I'm excited to see how much Parker can help once he's actually playing well.


That's been my thought for awhile now. If Tony could be healthy entering the playoffs, a post season with him, Manu and Tim playing well could be scary for the rest of the league. There are enough complimentary players on the Spurs for them to make a run.

[mogrovejo]

The both of them can't torch them together i guess?

Are they going to play with 2 balls? Either Tony Parker is the primary ball-handler or Manu Ginobili is. Plus, Bogans/Hill playing over Parker gives the Spurs an important edge defensively.

[Brazil]

-Like timvp said, Parker didn't hurt the team, like some people have suggested..he was still an asset on the floor and the Spurs' best lineups this season have involved Parker..Tony was having an off year, his injuries clearly affected him, so I think that speaks more on the poor play of our other key players earlier in the season..

-Manu is a completely different player than he was earlier in the season..he was admittedly struggling with confidence issues and was lacking the explosiveness we're seeing right now..his jump shot was also struggling..

Manu's improvement really has nothing to do with Parker being out at all..better stats due to more touches? yes..improvement in his game? no, nothing to do with it..

-Jefferson has played much better as well..this one could be related to Parker in a way, but Jefferson's assisted % has only gone up by 2% during this time IIRC..he's calling his own number more often, he's rebounding more, he's playing aggressively, and he's defending a lot better..this one has more to do with chemistry and the fact that he needed to step up with TP being out..

-The Spurs were finding a rhythm before TP was injured, winning their last 5 games with Tony in the lineup, all against quality teams..


The key is going to be Pop finding a balance between Parker and Ginobili's touches, while keeping Jefferson involved and keeping him in an aggressive mind state..the Parker-Ginobili part shouldn't be difficult at all since they have won 3 titles together and know each other extremely well, but the RJ part should be interesting..

Another key is that George Hill has to stay aggressive..Hill used to constantly go soft when Manu was on the floor last year and earlier in the season, deferring his entire game to Manu..this season, he's learned to keep his aggressiveness high when Manu is on the floor..he needs to do the same with TP on the floor too..

solid post ! :toast

[mogrovejo]

Exactly. Manu is arguably playing the best basketball of his entire career at the moment. No doubt he has kept this team afloat and he deserves credit for it. There is not one person who thought Manu could be this good still... It's pretty amazing. Saying that... How long will he be able to hold up playing like this... We already know he can't play a whole season at that level. Tony coming back will be able to give Tim and Manu much needed rest without the team going into meltdown mode on the court.

:nope

I don't think Ginobili is done. He's going to the line at his normal rate, his offensive rebounding rate is above his career level, his 3pt shooting efficiency is also good. Those are the best indicators of athleticism. If he stays healthy he'll get the rest of his game (the passing, the midrange shot, finishing at the rim) back.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3945394&postcount=80

[DesignatedT]

Are they going to play with 2 balls? Either Tony Parker is the primary ball-handler or Manu Ginobili is. Plus, Bogans/Hill playing over Parker gives the Spurs an important edge defensively.

The scarier thought would be that 1 out of the 2(Tony or Manu) is going to have the ball in their hands throughout the whole entire game.....

And out of the 4 games the Spurs and Lakers have played this year there has been a total of 0 games where both teams were at full strength... so I wouldn't put to much emphasis on what we have seen so far between these two teams.

[timvp]

Either Tony Parker is the primary ball-handler or Manu Ginobili is.

Since about 2004, TP and Ginobili have successfully shared ballhandling responsibilities ... with Ginobili handling the ball more at the end of periods and in the fourth quarter.

[manubili]

Great stats TIMVP, but...

WHo's gonna be the sixth man? Will Manu return to the bench playing like this? I know it's for tactical reasons. But those reasons seem to have change.

[spursrocks]

parker- advantage- speed, one man fast break, shoots 15-20ft
sucks at- cant shoot 3s, not a good defender, coming of an injury(not the same 2-3yrs ago)
george hill- longer, better defender, mesh well with gino and dick, importantly can shoot 3point shot.
gino pick n roll duncan, drives finds george hill open at the 3point spot, hill for 3(hill can take it)
imagine- gino driving to the lane finds open tony. tony will usually be open 20ft but is too near. tony usually will just drive again forcing manu to back out and spot up.
those who thinks gino will still take control when parker gets back is dreaming. tony will definitly command the floor. manu again will just spot up.
book it.
those who loves parker so much just keep dreaming, parker IS NOT THE SAME 2-3YRS AGO! he is a step slower, liability on defense and cannot shoot the 3BALL.
he just came off an injury, do you think he will be a factor?

if i were POP, if george returns, continue to start george, manu, dick, dice, and duncan. and let tony lead the 2nd unit with bonner, RMJ, blair, and bogans
but tony is a bone head, he wont accept the bench role. tony iverson 2.0

[Blake]

Individual Player Floor Time statistics
Player Min +/- Off Def Net48 W L Win%
Ginobili 54% +359 1.14 1.06 +8.6 46 23 66.7
Duncan 62% +343 1.10 1.03 +7.2 49 22 69.0
Jefferson 63% +271 1.11 1.05 +5.5 48 23 67.6
Bonner 28% +227 1.16 1.06 +10.5 33 24 57.9
Parker 43% +218 1.10 1.04 +6.6 34 14 70.8
McDyess 41% +210 1.10 1.03 +6.7 44 27 62.0
Hill 61% +195 1.10 1.06 +4.2 41 32 56.2
Mason 37% +79 1.09 1.06 +2.8 38 32 54.3
Blair 37% +73 1.10 1.07 +2.6 35 37 48.6
Bogans 40% +42 1.08 1.06 +1.4 32 37 46.4
Finley 10% +12 1.12 1.13 +1.5 11 13 45.8
Jackson 0% +2 1.06 0.98 +3.8 1 2 33.3
Temple 1% +1 1.08 1.13 +0.8 3 3 50.0
Mahinmi 3% -2 1.01 1.00 -0.8 8 10 44.4
Haislip 1% -5 0.93 1.00 -5.5 5 5 50.0
Hairston 7% -8 1.12 1.11 -1.3 15 17 46.9
Ratliff 4% -52 0.99 1.12 -13.7 5 14 26.3


Legend:

Min = the percentage of the team's total minutes the player was on the floor.

+/- = net points (+/-) for the team while the player was on the floor.

Off/Def = the points per possession while the player is on court.

Net48 = the team net points per 48 minutes of playing time for the player.

W = number of games a player's team outscored its opponents while he was on the court.

L = number of games a player's team was outscored by its opponents while he was on the court.

Win% = the winning percentage for the player based on Wins versus Losses.


http://www.82games.com/0910/0910SAS1.HTM

no, Parker does not hurt these Spurs.

[anakha]

I can't analyze players for shit

[DesignatedT]

:nope


http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3945394&postcount=80

I didn't think manu was "done" either... Props for the quote though

What I meant is that nobody would have thought Manu would be playing the best basketball of his career this year. I know many knew he could still be a good and effective player.

[mogrovejo]

The scarier thought would be that 1 out of the 2(Tony or Manu) is going to have the ball in their hands throughout the whole entire game.....

That's not scarier for the Lakers. Every possession Ginobili is off-the-ball is already a positive for them.


And out of the 4 games the Spurs and Lakers have played this year there has been a total of 0 games where both teams were at full strength... so I wouldn't put to much emphasis on what we have seen so far between these two teams.

Me neither.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Exactly. Manu is arguably playing the best basketball of his entire career at the moment. No doubt he has kept this team afloat and he deserves credit for it. There is not one person who thought Manu could be this good still... It's pretty amazing. Saying that... How long will he be able to hold up playing like this... We already know he can't play a whole season at that level. Tony coming back will be able to give Tim and Manu much needed rest without the team going into meltdown mode on the court.

Seriously, speak for yourself. Some of us have been defending him for the past two seasons trying to get it through people's head that Manu's bad play is due to his injury.

[DesignatedT]

Great stats TIMVP, but...

WHo's gonna be the sixth man? Will Manu return to the bench playing like this? I know it's for tactical reasons. But those reasons seem to have change.

That's the million dollar question.

[mogrovejo]

I didn't think manu was "done" either... Props for the quote though

What I meant is that nobody would have thought Manu would be playing the best basketball of his career this year. I know many knew he could still be a good and effective player.

Manu isn't playing the best basketball of his career, he's playing at his level when he's in form but in a different role.

Do you think Manu improved as a basketball player this Summer?

[DesignatedT]

Seriously, speak for yourself. Some of us have been defending him for the past two seasons trying to get it through people's head that Manu's bad play is due to his injury.

I had faith in Manu. I should have worded this different.

Did you think Manu's best basketball was in front of him? especially after watching the first half of the season.. If you say yes then your lying.

I meant nobody thought manu could return to the level of the 2005 finals. which he is playing like and probably even better.

I knew Manu could still play and I always backed Manu just like I do Tony.

[Sant1ago]

I think the problem with this analysis is that the spurs had one of the roughest schedules while TP was out. So the comparison might be a bit misleading since one would expect that the spurs wouldn't do so well against the best teams with TP out. Comparing the numbers the spurs got against a majority of average-mediocre teams (50 games with TP), with what the spurs got against a majority of good teams (20 games without him) isn't fair unless you can adjust for schedule strength.

[DesignatedT]

Manu isn't playing the best basketball of his career, he's playing at his level when he's in form but in a different role.

Do you think Manu improved as a basketball player this Summer?

I think the Manu of the past 2 months is the best Manu I have ever seen in a spur jersey. So yes, I think he is playing the best basketball of his career?

[hitmanyr2k]

I think the Manu of the past 2 months is the best Manu I have ever seen in a spur jersey. So yes, I think he is playing the best basketball of his career?

I think he was just as good, if not better, in 2008. I remember him stringing together some epic games in the 2nd half of that season. That 46 point game against the Cavs was classic.

[anonoftheinternets]

I think he was just as good, if not better, in 2008. I remember him stringing together some epic games in the 2nd half of that season. That 46 point game against the Cavs was classic.

+1 and then after that peak ... fatigue and injureies kicked in. I think pop has performed an impossible task, he has limited everyones minutes in such a way that spurs late season push, has come just at the right time. orrrr ... were screwed. But id like to imagine option 1 until im proven wrong in the PO

[DesignatedT]

I think he was just as good, if not better, in 2008. I remember him stringing together some epic games in the 2nd half of that season. That 46 point game against the Cavs was classic.

That was def the best year of his career.

[hitmanyr2k]

+1 and then after that peak ... fatigue and injureies kicked in. I think pop has performed an impossible task, he has limited everyones minutes in such a way that spurs late season push, has come just at the right time. orrrr ... were screwed. But id like to imagine option 1 until im proven wrong in the PO

Didn't Ginobili wreck his ankle in the last week of the regular season in '08? I don't remember him entering the playoffs healthy that year. And by the time they reached LA he was done.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm not sure what games Mojo has been watching but they're not the same ones I have. In any event, I think these stats are so folly because of the injuries the Spurs have endured all season. Directly Parker has not had a chance to play at full strength almost the entire season. Indirectly, Parker has not had a chance to play with Manu at the current confidence and health level he is at. It is no secret that when good players play with other good players they both benefit because of the way defense has to react.

Tony Parker carried this team in 2009. A healthy Tony Parker is only going to be a huge asset to this team and to even consider the opposite is simply unreal to me.

[dbestpro]

To simplify the argument as to who should be on the floor during the playoffs I suggest a 3 guard rotation with Hill, Manu, and, Parker. Who ever is playing the best should be on the floor at the end of the game even if all three are on the floor and RJ is on the pine.

Playoff DNPs for Mason, Hairston, Temple (Bogans may play some SF)

[Drachen]

Looking at the stats,the question begging to be asked is this: If Parker is considered to be such a big cog of the Spurs. how come his extended absence doesn't seem to have had a detrimental impact on the team? Stats are essentially the same with or without him so does this bolster the argument that he's expendable and maybe the Spurs could find a replacement who might have a bigger impact? Maybe a true pass-first, defensive PG with a true 3-point shot?
Or is it a case that Manu is simply playing out of his mind in Tony's absence and he won't be able to sustain this level of play without breaking down eventually so Tony's return is just what the Spurs need?

Someone probably answered this already, but Tony was injured all season. Compare Hills stats this season with Tony's last season. This would be more accurate.

[anonoftheinternets]

Didn't Ginobili wreck his ankle in the last week of the regular season in '08? I don't remember him entering the playoffs healthy that year. And by the time they reached LA he was done.

yup spot on. It was painful to watch. He somehow toughed his way through the phx (parker torched them) and hornets series (played big in key games). But the lakers were too much .. :lol sasha guarded him .... shows how injured he was.

[diego]

I'm honestly surprised the numbers are so close. Subjectively, the Spurs play a different brand of basketball without Parker. But statistically speaking, there really isn't much of a difference.

just goes to show that statistics only tell so much. IMO tony's injury coincided with several players picking up their play (mostly manu, hill, rj and bonner) and pop pulling his head out of his ass. it may have even forced pop to pull his head out of his ass. but its very difficult to say (especially as far away as I am) which came first- players doing better and pop fixing his rotation because he had less problems to address, or the players playing better because pop finally established a functional rotation. I'm too far away to say for sure, but at certain points it definitely felt like pop was to blame.

[FkLA]

Very few of the "Give the reins to Hill" advocates, including myself, claim that Hill is a better player than Tony...our main point which these stats prove (nice job btw stats are very interesting) is that the drop off at PG wouldnt be huge. We would ideally get some frontcourt help in exchange for Tony and I think that would more than make-up for the drop off at PG.

Hill-Manu-RJ-Timmy- <insert all-star big man> in my opinion would be better than what we currently have. Of course aquiring an all-star big man is easier said than done, but Parker should be expendable if the right deal presents itself.

[DesignatedT]

Very few of the "Give the reins to Hill" advocates, including myself, claim that Hill is a better player than Tony...our main point which these stats prove (nice job btw stats are very interesting) is that the drop off at PG wouldnt be huge. We would ideally get some frontcourt help in exchange for Tony and I think that would more than make-up for the drop off at PG.

Hill-Manu-RJ-Timmy- <insert all-star big man> in my opinion would be better than what we currently have. Of course aquiring an all-star big man is easier said than done, but Parker should be expendable if the right deal presents itself.

those stats are very deceiving.. stated by many already in the thread.

The spurs team in the beginning of the year was a much different team and Tony playing through injuries then also didn't help. Tony didn't have this version of Manu in the beginning of the year to play with also... remember that manu laid a big fucking egg until about 2 months ago.


the dropoff might not be that big if manu plays like this all year every year ofcourse though, we know that's not the case.

[EricB]

Sigh....

[lennyalderette]

all the so called "parker haters" arent so stupid are we now???!?!?!?!!? if you dont see the difference then your an idiot, if you think this team should be parkers go to hell and i hate the way parker acts out on the court. do you guys notice how the spurs when going to the bench start giving eachother high fives right before they sit down. however they completely ifnore or dont even bother to give frenchie a high five cause he seems like he doesnt want to be talked to. also it seems like hes a very jealous guy and hates that ginobili is the teams heart and soul

[peskypesky]

all the so called "parker haters" arent so stupid are we now???!?!?!?!!? if you dont see the difference then your an idiot, if you think this team should be parkers go to hell and i hate the way parker acts out on the court. do you guys notice how the spurs when going to the bench start giving eachother high fives right before they sit down. however they completely ifnore or dont even bother to give frenchie a high five cause he seems like he doesnt want to be talked to. also it seems like hes a very jealous guy and hates that ginobili is the teams heart and soul

i have a feeling Parker's marriage to a famous actress has had a bad effect on his ego.

[DesignatedT]

all the so called "parker haters" arent so stupid are we now???!?!?!?!!? if you dont see the difference then your an idiot, if you think this team should be parkers go to hell and i hate the way parker acts out on the court. do you guys notice how the spurs when going to the bench start giving eachother high fives right before they sit down. however they completely ifnore or dont even bother to give frenchie a high five cause he seems like he doesnt want to be talked to. also it seems like hes a very jealous guy and hates that ginobili is the teams heart and soul

:stfu

[lennyalderette]

those stats are very deceiving.. stated by many already in the thread.

The spurs team in the beginning of the year was a much different team and Tony playing through injuries then also didn't help. Tony didn't have this version of Manu in the beginning of the year to play with also... remember that manu laid a big fucking egg until about 2 months ago.


the dropoff might not be that big if manu plays like this all year every year ofcourse though, we know that's not the case.

ok but if your saying that well i could also say that parkers numbers are way more deceiving than hills in that parkers plus minus differential and ppg mean shit when lets say he loses games while putting up big points. he plays no defense whatsoever george hill can play better D with his dick than parkers raptor arms

p.s ****all comments made here are from the comments ive heard about thrill penis on spurs talk i made it a point to not see hills penis as it would ruin my spurs game experience bahahahaha

:flag:

[lennyalderette]

:stfu
:flipoff

[DesignatedT]

ok but if your saying that well i could also say that parkers numbers are way more deceiving than hills in that parkers plus minus differential and ppg mean shit when lets say he loses games while putting up big points. he plays no defense whatsoever george hill can play better D with his dick than parkers raptor arms

i couldnt even understand what you were saying.

tony and manu have won 3 championships playing together.. do you really feel that's a problem?

[Blake]

all the so called "parker haters" arent so stupid are we now???!?!?!?!!?

pretty stupid

[G-Dawgg]

Parker hurts the team. He dominates the ball too much on offense which in turn affects team chemistry... everybody doesn't get involved on offense. Although Hill may not be a better player than Parker, he is a better fit. Hill may not be the offensive force that parker is but he is still a very capable scorer, his defense is much better than parker's and he doesn't seem to lag the offense down by dominating the ball like parker does. Parker's game has evolved to the point where he is no longer that great of a fit on this team.

[EricB]

:lol @ The Parker haters holding on to small small threads of anything.

[santymrc]

Heading into this season, many Spurs fans were talking about the reins being handed over from Tim Duncan to Tony Parker. However, after a slew of injuries combined with relatively poor play, a vocal minority of Spurs fans are talking quite differently: Are these Spurs better without Tony Parker?

The theory goes that since Parker is a scoring point guard, his skillset no longer meshes well with the more well-rounded roster, thus the Spurs are better with a more passive, defensive-minded player like George Hill running point guard and Manu Ginobili orchestrating the show.

I compared the numbers from the 26 games Parker has missed this season to the 50 games Parker has played in to see what the statistics have to say on this matter.


http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/3931/tp1ys.jpg

I'm honestly surprised the numbers are so close. Subjectively, the Spurs play a different brand of basketball without Parker. But statistically speaking, there really isn't much of a difference. With Parker, the Spurs have outscored the opponents by 5.49 points per 100 possessions. Without Parker, that number drops to 5.31.

Looking at those numbers, it isn't fair to say Parker has hurt the Spurs this season. It is fair, however, to say that Parker hasn't been much more of an asset this season than what San Antonio is getting from George Hill.

If you compare the Parker's advanced stats to Hill's advanced stats, the case against Parker becomes even more difficult to make.


http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/2905/tp2x.jpg

Overall, these number reinforce a few points. First of all, Hill should be commended for the job he has done filling in for Parker. He's had big shoes to fill and has done about as well as possible. The dropoff from Parker to Hill this season has been minimal. That said, if a constantly injured shell of what was supposed to be Tony Parker helped this team, I'm excited to see how much Parker can help once he's actually playing well.

Great numbers, but, did took into them (the numbers) the overall .500+ or -.500 of the teams against they played?

[FkLA]

those stats are very deceiving.. stated by many already in the thread.

The spurs team in the beginning of the year was a much different team and Tony playing through injuries then also didn't help. Tony didn't have this version of Manu in the beginning of the year to play with also... remember that manu laid a big fucking egg until about 2 months ago.


the dropoff might not be that big if manu plays like this all year every year ofcourse though, we know that's not the case.

Sorry but I dont buy that argument. Sure Manu wasnt playing like he is right now but Tim Duncan was playing at a pretty high level early in the season, a level that has dropped off after the all-star break coinciding with Hill being a starter. Also it will be very hard for Manu to continue playing the way he is and orchestrating the offense considering how much Tony dominates the ball, and its no coincedence that guys like RJ and Blair play so much better when they share the court with Manu. RJ didnt magically turn his season around out of the blue, our offense runs much more smoothly through Manu than through Tony mainly because he's a much better passer and actually looks for teammates consistently. Unfortunately Im fully expecting Pop to send Manu back to the bench once Hill returns.

And if we really want to get into things that "skew" these stats, like someone already said we've been playing a pretty rough schedule against alot of elite teams with Hill as a starter...yet despite that the stats show that he's still held his own and that there isnt an astronomical drop off like Tony supporters claim. Noone is saying Hill > TP, simply that Hill can hold down the point respectably and that the addition of the asset we'd get in return for TP would outweigh the drop off at PG. Honestly the only way you cannot see that is out of loyalty to Tony, which I understand to some degree.

[whottt]

Tony Parker is about to open a can of asswhup. It's easy to kick someone when they are down but anyone that doesn't think this guy is a huge asset to this team is a dumbass who evdentially missed the last 3 titles the Spurs won.

And more to the point, he responds to challenges exceptionally well, that's why he has started in the NBA since he was 19 years old. That's why he started for an NBA champion at the age of 20 at the hardest position in the NBA to learn.

[lennyalderette]

i couldnt even understand what you were saying.

tony and manu have won 3 championships playing together.. do you really feel that's a problem?
all dickheadedness aside, i agree with you that hes a hell of a player, and what hes done for this org. its huge!!! but what im saying is the spurs are constantly changing their style and trying to figure out what can give us an edge right? out with the old in with the new if available right??ok signing temple lets me know parker is no longer what pop wants at the pg position, because there were better options at the pg guard position but he ends up signing a kid who resembles the shit out of hilll, and so far temple and hill look pretty darn good out there!! parkers making 12 million freaking dollars this year, ready to play with the french team as soon as possible and seems uninterested in the spurs now. (believe me i had no prob with parker when he was alot younger and alot less arrogant)

georgehill is making 1 million dollars this year thats it if we get rid of t.p since he doesnt look like he minds leaving anyway and save and trade while george hill is running the spurs dont you think that would help the spurs chemistry, financial,interior defense situation???? i think thats a great way to fix alot of the problems just my opinion though im not bashing the guy for the hell of it.

[EricB]

Tony Parker is about to open a can of asswhup. It's easy to kick someone when they are down but anyone that doesn't think this guy is a huge asset to this team is a dumbass who evdentially missed the last 3 titles the Spurs won.

And more to the point, he responds to challenges exceptionally well, that's why he has started in the NBA since he was 19 years old. That's why he started for an NBA champion at the age of 20 at the hardest position in the NBA to learn.

He practically carried them in the 07 finals.

Duncan was good but not GREAT Ginobili was OK until Game 4 4th quarter.

Everyone pretty much laid eggs from Finley to Barry to everyone but Parker carried them and was huge.


Unreal how 3 years later thats totally forgotten...

[rayray2k8]

Can't be picky now. Spurs need all the help they can get and they really need it at PG.

[roycrikside]

Heading into this season, many Spurs fans were talking about the reins being handed over from Tim Duncan to Tony Parker. However, after a slew of injuries combined with relatively poor play, a vocal minority of Spurs fans are talking quite differently: Are these Spurs better without Tony Parker?

The theory goes that since Parker is a scoring point guard, his skillset no longer meshes well with the more well-rounded roster, thus the Spurs are better with a more passive, defensive-minded player like George Hill running point guard and Manu Ginobili orchestrating the show.

I compared the numbers from the 26 games Parker has missed this season to the 50 games Parker has played in to see what the statistics have to say on this matter.


http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/3931/tp1ys.jpg

I'm honestly surprised the numbers are so close. Subjectively, the Spurs play a different brand of basketball without Parker. But statistically speaking, there really isn't much of a difference. With Parker, the Spurs have outscored the opponents by 5.49 points per 100 possessions. Without Parker, that number drops to 5.31.

Looking at those numbers, it isn't fair to say Parker has hurt the Spurs this season. It is fair, however, to say that Parker hasn't been much more of an asset this season than what San Antonio is getting from George Hill.

If you compare the Parker's advanced stats to Hill's advanced stats, the case against Parker becomes even more difficult to make.


http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/2905/tp2x.jpg

Overall, these number reinforce a few points. First of all, Hill should be commended for the job he has done filling in for Parker. He's had big shoes to fill and has done about as well as possible. The dropoff from Parker to Hill this season has been minimal. That said, if a constantly injured shell of what was supposed to be Tony Parker helped this team, I'm excited to see how much Parker can help once he's actually playing well.


First off, I just want to get it out of the way that I still definitely want TP in the rotation and that I don't think there's a chance for us to win the title without him contributing.

However, with that said, I think your arguments aren't very logical and your stats are skewed.

Your point differential numbers don't take into account the quality of the competition we're playing. Yeah, maybe the scoring margin isn't improving, but 5 pt wins over the likes of LA, Orlando, and Cleveland are more impressive than wins over Memphis, New Orleans and Golden State. The Spurs have played their basketball of the season during the toughest stretch of the season, and they've done it without Parker. Those facts cannot be disputed.

Secondly, I don't see the point in making it a Tony vs. Hill thing. When Tony was playing, he still had the benefit of playing with Hill. These past 15 games or however many it's been, Hill hasn't had Tony's help.

Finally, I don't think you should've broken the stats up as the 50 games Tony has played and the 26 he didn't. I think the only data you should've used is the numbers after Tony broke his hand. That's the team we've been watching of late. The other ten games he missed are irrelevant. Everyone was playing bad back then.

[DesignatedT]

Sorry but I dont buy that argument. Sure Manu wasnt playing like he is right now but Tim Duncan was playing at a pretty high level early in the season, a level that has dropped off after the all-star break coinciding with Hill being a starter. Also it will be very hard for Manu to continue playing the way he is and orchestrating the offense considering how much Tony dominates the ball, and its no coincedence that guys like RJ and Blair play so much better when they share the court with Manu. RJ didnt magically turn his season around out of the blue, our offense runs much more smoothly through Manu than through Tony mainly because he's a much better passer and actually looks for teammates consistently. Unfortunately Im fully expecting Pop to send Manu back to the bench once Hill returns.

And if we really want to get into things that "skew" these stats, like someone already said we've been playing a pretty rough schedule against alot of elite teams with Hill as a starter...yet despite that the stats show that he's still held his own and that there isnt an astronomical drop off like Tony supporters claim. Noone is saying Hill > TP, simply that Hill can hold down the point respectably and that the addition of the asset we'd get in return for TP would outweigh the drop off at PG. Honestly the only way you cannot see that is out of loyalty to Tony, which I understand to some degree.

but then you go into the other players on the team in the beginning of the year. playing with Tony/Manu whatever... but RJ and Dice are both totally different players then they were in the beginning of the season. They are both playing better on both ends of the floor and its not only because there playing with Manu instead of Tony... They have developed confidence and know the system.. something they didn't have/know in the beginning of the season...

The overall attitude in the beginning of the season also... There was no sense of urgency... just taking game by game with no worries.. the whole team had that attitude of "it will click sooner or later" and it did... wayyy later.

I understand that you want manu to have the ball more and that this group has developed a little chemistry together and that's fine. I'm sure pop will put that same unit out there at times and balance it out as much as possible.. but there is no way we are a "better" team without Tony playing.. that's just retarded.

and as for RJ... he led the team in scoring tonight and went for 18 points.... with tony playing.... just another example on how much of a different player he is from the beginning of the season and it doesn't have anything to do with tony or manu.

[lennyalderette]

Sorry but I dont buy that argument. Sure Manu wasnt playing like he is right now but Tim Duncan was playing at a pretty high level early in the season, a level that has dropped off after the all-star break coinciding with Hill being a starter. Also it will be very hard for Manu to continue playing the way he is and orchestrating the offense considering how much Tony dominates the ball, and its no coincedence that guys like RJ and Blair play so much better when they share the court with Manu. RJ didnt magically turn his season around out of the blue, our offense runs much more smoothly through Manu than through Tony mainly because he's a much better passer and actually looks for teammates consistently. Unfortunately Im fully expecting Pop to send Manu back to the bench once Hill returns.

And if we really want to get into things that "skew" these stats, like someone already said we've been playing a pretty rough schedule against alot of elite teams with Hill as a starter...yet despite that the stats show that he's still held his own and that there isnt an astronomical drop off like Tony supporters claim. Noone is saying Hill > TP, simply that Hill can hold down the point respectably and that the addition of the asset we'd get in return for TP would outweigh the drop off at PG. Honestly the only way you cannot see that is out of loyalty to Tony, which I understand to some degree.


well said !!! plus the 11 million dollar, no international play difference. and lets talk about upside, and overall skill/athleticism!!! this is what does it for me the cocky shit just makes me mad

[DesignatedT]

all dickheadedness aside, i agree with you that hes a hell of a player, and what hes done for this org. its huge!!! but what im saying is the spurs are constantly changing their style and trying to figure out what can give us an edge right? out with the old in with the new if available right??ok signing temple lets me know parker is no longer what pop wants at the pg position, because there were better options at the pg guard position but he ends up signing a kid who resembles the shit out of hilll, and so far temple and hill look pretty darn good out there!! parkers making 12 million freaking dollars this year, ready to play with the french team as soon as possible and seems uninterested in the spurs now. (believe me i had no prob with parker when he was alot younger and alot less arrogant)

georgehill is making 1 million dollars this year thats it if we get rid of t.p since he doesnt look like he minds leaving anyway and save and trade while george hill is running the spurs dont you think that would help the spurs chemistry, financial,interior defense situation???? i think thats a great way to fix alot of the problems just my opinion though im not bashing the guy for the hell of it.

and if we go on to the WCF or Finals with Parker,Hill,Manu all in the rotation... you will still feel this way?

[peskypesky]

He practically carried them in the 07 finals.

Duncan was good but not GREAT Ginobili was OK until Game 4 4th quarter.

Everyone pretty much laid eggs from Finley to Barry to everyone but Parker carried them and was huge.


Unreal how 3 years later thats totally forgotten...

not forgotten AT ALL. but we're talking about this season, not 2007. and this season, the Spurs appear to be a much better team with Parker out. the offense is unpredictable and full of motion and passing. it's a thing of beauty, with ALL the options being taken advantage of.

when Parker's playing, the offense stagnates and becomes very predictable.

and defense? no question that Hill is a more dedicate and skilled defender than Parker.

so, 2007, yeah, Parker was great. but if you've watched the Spurs this season, they have seemed like two completely different teams with and without Parker. and if you ask me which team i like more, i'll just say it's the one that beat the Cavs, Celtics, Magic and Lakers in a two-week period.

[FkLA]

He practically carried them in the 07 finals.

Duncan was good but not GREAT Ginobili was OK until Game 4 4th quarter.

Everyone pretty much laid eggs from Finley to Barry to everyone but Parker carried them and was huge.


Unreal how 3 years later thats totally forgotten...

Not forgotten, he was huge without a doubt. But its those same performances and loyalty that comes with that that makes some of you oblivious to the situation at hand...Hill is no Tony but he can hold his own. He's proved that each and every single time he's had to step in for Tony, he's lived up to every challenge. Im with Tony all the way for the rest of the season, but if the right deal presents itself where the team can aquire frontcourt help in the off-season Spurs need to do it. Loyalty aside, its the smart move.

[SequSpur]

Tony Parker is about to open a can of asswhup. It's easy to kick someone when they are down but anyone that doesn't think this guy is a huge asset to this team is a dumbass who evdentially missed the last 3 titles the Spurs won.

And more to the point, he responds to challenges exceptionally well, that's why he has started in the NBA since he was 19 years old. That's why he started for an NBA champion at the age of 20 at the hardest position in the NBA to learn.


I'm not sure what games Mojo has been watching but they're not the same ones I have. In any event, I think these stats are so folly because of the injuries the Spurs have endured all season. Directly Parker has not had a chance to play at full strength almost the entire season. Indirectly, Parker has not had a chance to play with Manu at the current confidence and health level he is at. It is no secret that when good players play with other good players they both benefit because of the way defense has to react.

Tony Parker carried this team in 2009. A healthy Tony Parker is only going to be a huge asset to this team and to even consider the opposite is simply unreal to me.

You know earlier today I was doing some reading in the Spurs forum and I noticed some dipshit with less than 1000 posts making comments about veterans here that have been here for along time and that post count doesn't mean shit... If you read these two takes, you would understand what the fuck I am talking about. It does mean something and if you can't recognize that then kiss my ass.

As for Parker, this dude only knows one speed and that's total fuckin domination. The dude has been hurt all fuckin year, but by his own hand...The dude shouldn't be playing summer ball because of his style of play. He fucking goes balls to the wall every play and usually ends up on his ass.. I am amazed that he has lasted this long without injury.

Tony Parker will fuckin shred the Western Conference while Matt Bonner and Keith Bogans drive this team back into mediocrity and the shit will be over...

But I guarantee you that Parker won't be the reason...

#9 is back.

FO.

[lennyalderette]

pretty stupid


ill save this post for your future, " Trade parker thread"

[DesignatedT]

not forgotten AT ALL. but we're talking about this season, not 2007. and this season, the Spurs appear to be a much better team with Parker out. the offense is unpredictable and full of motion and passing. it's a thing of beauty, with ALL the options being taken advantage of.

when Parker's playing, the offense stagnates and becomes very predictable.

and defense? no question that Hill is a more dedicate and skilled defender than Parker.

so, 2007, yeah, Parker was great. but if you've watched the Spurs this season, they have seemed like two completely different teams with and without Parker. and if you ask me which team i like more, i'll just say it's the one that beat the Cavs, Celtics, Magic and Lakers in a two-week period.

Parker carried this team all year in 2009 also... remember his 55 pt game?

This team is better with Tony AND Manu...I agree that with Manu playing at this level(which he isn't always playing at this level,people seem to forget) Then we should try and get the ball in his hands as much as possible and pop did that tonight. Pop should balance it out to where these guys are not always on the floor together and lead seperate units at times out there... but there is absolutely no way we are a better team without Tony playing, just need to figure out a rotation that works best for both him and manu....

[shingo_318]

out with the old in with the new if available right??

this

[Mr Bones]

The question really isn't whether Hill is better than Parker, but if in the current economic environment it makes sense to entertain the idea of using Parker as a trade chip. Memphis offered Mayo and Thabeet to Golden State for Monta Ellis before the trade deadline this year... if they made the same type of offer to the Spurs in July for Parker, would it make sense for the Spurs to do it? Both players are young and locked up for a couple of years-- Parker, facing the prospect of a Duncan-less future might strongly consider going elsewhere.

[DesignatedT]

The question really isn't whether Hill is better than Parker, but if in the current economic environment it makes sense to entertain the idea of using Parker as a trade chip. Memphis offered Mayo and Thabeet to Golden State for Monta Ellis before the trade deadline this year... if they made the same type of offer to the Spurs in July for Parker, would it make sense for the Spurs to do it? Both players are young and locked up for a couple of years-- Parker, facing the prospect of a Duncan-less future might strongly consider going elsewhere.

if we make it to the WCF or the NBA Finals... nobody will be talking about a "trade chip" .

that discussion is for another day.

[FkLA]

but then you go into the other players on the team in the beginning of the year. playing with Tony/Manu whatever... but RJ and Dice are both totally different players then they were in the beginning of the season. They are both playing better on both ends of the floor and its not only because there playing with Manu instead of Tony... They have developed confidence and know the system.. something they didn't have/know in the beginning of the season...

The overall attitude in the beginning of the season also... There was no sense of urgency... just taking game by game with no worries.. the whole team had that attitude of "it will click sooner or later" and it did... wayyy later.

I understand that you want manu to have the ball more and that this group has developed a little chemistry together and that's fine. I'm sure pop will put that same unit out there at times and balance it out as much as possible.. but there is no way we are a "better" team without Tony playing.. that's just retarded.

and as for RJ... he led the team in scoring tonight and went for 18 points.... with tony playing.... just another example on how much of a different player he is from the beginning of the season and it doesn't have anything to do with tony or manu.

I dont think the Spurs are better with Parker sitting out, Im obviously not too fond of Parker but even I know thats a pretty ridiculous opinion to have. My whole argument is that Parker should be expendable in the offseason...that Hill is ready to take the reins, and that the frontcourt help we'd get in exchange for Tony would outweight the drop off at PG.

And we could also go all night with reasons why the team wasnt performing as well early in the season. But regardless of lack of urgency and all that the fact remains that the Spurs have played their best ball by a mile with Hill at PG and with Manu orchestrating the offense. The Spurs can live without Parker, he is expendable which is basically my argument. You guys are simply loyal to Parker, which like I said I understand, but once you get past that youd realize that Hill's emergence has made Parker expendable to fill bigger needs.


The question really isn't whether Hill is better than Parker, but if in the current economic environment it makes sense to entertain the idea of using Parker as a trade chip. Memphis offered Mayo and Thabeet to Golden State for Monta Ellis before the trade deadline this year... if they made the same type of offer to the Spurs in July for Parker, would it make sense for the Spurs to do it? Both players are young and locked up for a couple of years-- Parker, facing the prospect of a Duncan-less future might strongly consider going elsewhere.

:tu

Wouldnt do Mayo+Thabeet for Tony though.

[lennyalderette]

and if we go on to the WCF or Finals with Parker,Hill,Manu all in the rotation... you will still feel this way?


yes, i think if we make the right moves we will be a better team without him. Of course AT this moment were a better team with him playing in some rotation as long as we have him of course we need him! but what im saying is we need to weigh our option s out with him for the overall future of this team.
He was built for a different spurs team, and i think hes over pop screaming at him like he hes a 19yr old rookie, and not getting the recognition he "deserves" i mean hes a different breed than the average spurs players. i used to stick up fot the guy when my friends hated him, and now i just cant believe some of the things this guy has said as of late.

[whottt]

The question really isn't whether Hill is better than Parker, but if in the current economic environment it makes sense to entertain the idea of using Parker as a trade chip. Memphis offered Mayo and Thabeet to Golden State for Monta Ellis before the trade deadline this year... if they made the same type of offer to the Spurs in July for Parker, would it make sense for the Spurs to do it? Both players are young and locked up for a couple of years-- Parker, facing the prospect of a Duncan-less future might strongly consider going elsewhere.

So what you're saying is if we had David Robinson and got Tim Duncan we should have traded David Robinson :tu

[EricB]

The question really isn't whether Hill is better than Parker, but if in the current economic environment it makes sense to entertain the idea of using Parker as a trade chip. Memphis offered Mayo and Thabeet to Golden State for Monta Ellis before the trade deadline this year... if they made the same type of offer to the Spurs in July for Parker, would it make sense for the Spurs to do it? Both players are young and locked up for a couple of years-- Parker, facing the prospect of a Duncan-less future might strongly consider going elsewhere.


If your gonna trade Parker its gotta be for an all star bigman.

You can't settle for a Thabeet Mayo trade.

[MannyIsGod]

Tony Parker is the 3rd best point guard in this league. He may be 3.b or 3.a with Rondo and he may be behind Chris Paul and Derron Williams but if you sleep on a hurt Tony Parker the way people slept on a hurt Dwayne Wade you're in for a surprise. Tony Parker like Tim and Manu should be Spurs for life.

[whottt]

It is a total myth that we can win a title with George Hill as PG. It is a total fantasy at this point, it's not a myth win Tony Parker. If you are going to trade one of them then the one you trade is George Hill, and not the HOF PG.

[DesignatedT]

I dont think the Spurs are better with Parker sitting out, Im obviously not too fond of Parker but even I know thats a pretty ridiculous opinion to have. My whole argument is that Parker should be expendable in the offseason...that Hill is ready to take the reins, and that the frontcourt help we'd get in exchange for Tony would outweight the drop off at PG.

And we could also go all night with reasons why the team wasnt performing as well early in the season. But regardless of lack of urgency and all that the fact remains that the Spurs have played their best ball by a mile with Hill at PG and with Manu orchestrating the offense. The Spurs can live without Parker, he is expendable which is basically my argument. You guys are simply loyal to Parker, which like I said I understand, but once you get past that youd realize that Hill's emergence has made Parker expendable to fill bigger needs.

This team isn't better without Tony. If we get booted in the first round again then obviously everyone should be open to listening to deals. If this team ends up being efffective with Hill,Manu,Tony backcourt and we end up making the WCF or Finals then why would we entertain trade talks? Why would you want to get rid of the best backcourt in the NBA.

[EricB]

Tony Parker is the 3rd best point guard in this league. He may be 3.b or 3.a with Rondo and he may be behind Chris Paul and Derron Williams but if you sleep on a hurt Tony Parker the way people slept on a hurt Dwayne Wade you're in for a surprise. Tony Parker like Tim and Manu should be Spurs for life.


Parker scored 8, but could've easily gotten 16 with how easy he got to the rim and the open shots he created...

[roycrikside]

He practically carried them in the 07 finals.

Duncan was good but not GREAT Ginobili was OK until Game 4 4th quarter.

Everyone pretty much laid eggs from Finley to Barry to everyone but Parker carried them and was huge.


Unreal how 3 years later thats totally forgotten...

Yes, yes. He dominated the immortal Boobie Gibson. :rolleyes He also was +24 for that series while Manu was +48, but whatever. I never understood the argument why Duncan got Finals MVP in '05 just because he was the team's best player, even if he didn't have the best stats, but everyone just smiled and nodded when Tony got it in '07. How does that make sense?

Also, if you remember the '07 playoffs at all (which you clearly don't), every critical road game the team won, they won because of Manu (Games 3 and 4 at Denver, game 5 at Phoenix, game 4 at Utah). But yeah, let's focus on the sweep at the end against a completely mismatched Cavs team.

[Mr Bones]

So what you're saying is if we had David Robinson and got Tim Duncan we should have traded David Robinson :tu

Nope, not what I'm saying at all. Duncan/Robinson formed the strongest frontcourt in the NBA-- Parker/Hill do not form the strongest backcourt in the NBA. Moving Hill to the 2 guard takes away his defensive advantage over point guards... it's a way to deal with a problem, but not a perfect solution. I'm not a Parker hater at all, by the way-- I like him a lot. Just saying, with the Spurs all in financially, trading Parker could be a way to address shortcomings with the team without taking a big step backwards anywhere else. If the Spurs were to acquire Mayo & Thabeet and sign Splitter this summer, their most glaring weakness-- interior defense & shot blocking-- would become one of their strengths.

[lennyalderette]

If your gonna trade Parker its gotta be for an all star bigman.

You can't settle for a Thabeet Mayo trade.

exactly you better believe they can find a diamond with a trade chip like T.p soot i'd even say to minnesota who had like three pg's and now only have one haha hey give me AL jefferson and ricky rubio rights and ill give you T.p!! rubio would love to play with a manu,duncan,tiago,jefferson AL and rj. some others: aldridge (por) Cousins (top pick) horford, id even say aldridge and fernandez for t.p

[DesignatedT]

Yes, yes. He dominated the immortal Boobie Gibson. :rolleyes He also was +24 for that series while Manu was +48, but whatever. I never understood the argument why Duncan got Finals MVP in '05 just because he was the team's best player, even if he didn't have the best stats, but everyone just smiled and nodded when Tony got it in '07. How does that make sense?

Also, if you remember the '07 playoffs at all (which you clearly don't), every critical road game the team won, they won because of Manu (Games 3 and 4 at Denver, game 5 at Phoenix, game 4 at Utah). But yeah, let's focus on the sweep at the end against a completely mismatched Cavs team.

its the "finals mvp" not the "playoff mvp"....so yeah im pretty sure there going to focus on the finals.

[FkLA]

This team isn't better without Tony. If we get booted in the first round again then obviously everyone should be open to listening to deals. If this team ends up being efffective with Hill,Manu,Tony backcourt and we end up making the WCF or Finals then why would we entertain trade talks? Why would you want to get rid of the best backcourt in the NBA.

Unless the Spurs win it all, trading Parker for frontcourt help makes sense. Sure it'd be nice to have the best backcourt in the NBA but not when Timmy is holding down the paint on his own (we dont know what to expect with Tiago or if he'll even be here next season). You need to sacrifice some of that backcourt talent to help Timmy out, Parker is younger than Manu and more talented than Hill...he's the only one that will net us an all-star caliber big man.


Nope, not what I'm saying at all. Duncan/Robinson formed the strongest frontcourt in the NBA-- Parker/Hill do not form the strongest backcourt in the NBA. Moving Hill to the 2 guard takes away his defensive advantage over point guards... it's a way to deal with a problem, but not a perfect solution. I'm not a Parker hater at all, by the way-- I like him a lot. Just saying, with the Spurs all in financially, trading Parker could be a way to address shortcomings with the team without taking a big step backwards anywhere else. If the Spurs were to acquire Mayo & Thabeet and sign Splitter this summer, their most glaring weakness-- interior defense & shot blocking-- would become one of their strengths.

For alot of these peeps it really is about loyalty, which is understandable. But its the smart move though it really is.

[roycrikside]

its the "finals mvp" not the "playoff mvp"....so yeah im pretty sure there going to focus on the finals.

My point is it's pretty dumb to make an argument about how good a player is just because he won a finals MVP in a series that was a formality and where he had the biggest mismatch on the floor.

Once we beat the Suns in the second round, everyone here was 90% sure we'd win that ring. Once the Pistons lost to Cleveland, everyone was 100% sure.

There's this famous picture of Tim, Manu and Tony laughing it up on the bench during the end of Game 5 of the WCF against Utah from that year. You could see it in their eyes. They knew.

[whottt]

Nope, not what I'm saying at all. Duncan/Robinson formed the strongest frontcourt in the NBA-- Parker/Hill do not form the strongest backcourt in the NBA. Moving Hill to the 2 guard takes away his defensive advantage over point guards... it's a way to deal with a problem, but not a perfect solution. I'm not a Parker hater at all, by the way-- I like him a lot. Just saying, with the Spurs all in financially, trading Parker could be a way to address shortcomings with the team without taking a big step backwards anywhere else. If the Spurs were to acquire Mayo & Thabeet and sign Splitter this summer, their most glaring weakness-- interior defense & shot blocking-- would become one of their strengths.

If Tony Parker and George Hill don't play well together it's because George Hill is not good enough, not Tony Parker. George Hill is the guy that couldn't get off the bench last year, Tony Parker is the guy that has been off it since the 4th game of his career.

I see no problem with having two great guards, you damn sure aren't going to get a player as good as Parker is in return for him, it's just going to take George some time. And I also don't see any problems with defense either because Tony actually does a good job defending shooting guards. He's better at that than he is at a defending PG's...and guys like Kobe are the PG's for their team, so Hill is a natural to play guys like that.

[dav4463]

Parker, Hill, and Ginobili is a guard rotation that nobody in the league wants to play against in the playoffs.

[Mr Bones]

If Tony Parker and George Hill don't play well together it's because George Hill is not good enough, not Tony Parker. George Hill is the guy that couldn't get off the bench last year, Tony Parker is the guy that has been off it since the 4th game of his career.

I see no problem with having two great guards, it's just going to take George some time. And I also don't see any problems with defense either because Tony actually does a good job defending shooting guards. He's actually better at that than he is at a defending PG's...and guys like Kobe are the PG's for their team, so Hill is a natural to play guys like htat.

I generally agree with what you are saying. I guess my point has more to do with salary cap/financial issues. The Spurs went all in financially before this season (a move I applauded) and now have very little flexibility with which to make moves this upcoming summer. Like you, I don't see a problem with defense when Hill and Parker are together-- but the problem with helping Duncan on the inside seems at least somewhat glaring, and that's why I think the idea of a defensive big + a good guard in exchange for Parker would have to at least be looked at seriously by the Spurs if it came up. Mayo/Thabeet was the first one I thought of since those guys were already offered as a pair for a very good point guard. Another option that comes to mind is Dalembert/Jrue Holiday, both very good defenders.

[EricB]

I generally agree with what you are saying. I guess my point has more to do with salary cap/financial issues. The Spurs went all in financially before this season (a move I applauded) and now have very little flexibility with which to make moves this upcoming summer. Like you, I don't see a problem with defense when Hill and Parker are together-- but the problem with helping Duncan on the inside seems at least somewhat glaring, and that's why I think the idea of a defensive big + a good guard in exchange for Parker would have to at least be looked at seriously by the Spurs if it came up. Mayo/Thabeet was the first one I thought of since those guys were already offered as a pair for a very good point guard. Another option that comes to mind is Dalembert/Jrue Holiday, both very good defenders.


Dalembert :lmao

tremendous fail

[kaji157]

This stats means nothing because those are two different teams. It would be very dissapointing if a "injuried" HOF PG would put the same stats as a 2nd year player.
If the reason of why Tony Parker looks expendable is that Manu and the team in general is playing better, then this will be proved in the playoffs, if not, Parker is as expendable as this stats suggest and will be up to Pop to decide what to do.

[kaji157]

I generally agree with what you are saying. I guess my point has more to do with salary cap/financial issues. The Spurs went all in financially before this season (a move I applauded) and now have very little flexibility with which to make moves this upcoming summer. Like you, I don't see a problem with defense when Hill and Parker are together-- but the problem with helping Duncan on the inside seems at least somewhat glaring, and that's why I think the idea of a defensive big + a good guard in exchange for Parker would have to at least be looked at seriously by the Spurs if it came up. Mayo/Thabeet was the first one I thought of since those guys were already offered as a pair for a very good point guard. Another option that comes to mind is Dalembert/Jrue Holiday, both very good defenders.

I prefer Mayo-Thabeet mainly because that way the Spurs would have building blocks by the time TD and Manu are gone.

[Mr Bones]

Dalembert :lmao

tremendous fail

Dalembert rotating with Splitter next to Duncan would be one of the best interior defenses in the NBA.

[timvpimp]

more often than not Tony plays off the lento rhythm of the team's offense but I don't see it a sign Tony hurts the team. even without functioning like a traditional pass-first PG, Tony can still bring a lot of positiveness with the unorthodox style he has. IMHO Tony should be used alongside Manu, who will take more responsibilities of running the offense with Tony pushing more attacks himself.

[DesignatedT]

Dalembert rotating with Splitter next to Duncan would be one of the best interior defenses in the NBA.

dalembert sucks.

[timvpimp]

Dalembert rotating with Splitter next to Duncan would be one of the best interior defenses in the NBA.
agreed. The only problem is Dalembert's contract which is too profligate. If dude is waived sometime in future I would like to see him in Spurs jersey with 3-4 million annual salary.

[lennyalderette]

agreed. The only problem is Dalembert's contract which is too profligate. If dude is waived sometime in future I would like to see him in Spurs jersey with 3-4 million annual salary.
only to be traded to charlotte before the playoffs :bang

[timvpimp]

dalembert sucks.
Yup he sucks identically as bad as Duncan does at the end of defense. We've got Mr Bonner who's so damn great a specialist that easily kills the opposing team with his superb skills in offense, hence there's zero need to give a flying shit about our defense which used to be great in our champion years but has been fucked to death since then.

[EricB]

Dalembert rotating with Splitter next to Duncan would be one of the best interior defenses in the NBA.

Dalembert's bball IQ is so low it makes Nazr Mohammed look like Robert Horry.

[DesignatedT]

Yup he sucks identically as bad as Duncan does at the end of defense. We've got Mr Bonner who's so damn great a specialist that easily kills the opposing team with his superb skills in offense, hence there's zero need to give a flying shit about our defense which used to be great in our champion years but has been fucked to death since then.

please don't compare duncan to dalembert. ever.

[Mr Bones]

Dalembert is very weak offensively, but is a defensive specialist who could thrive next to Duncan and Splitter. He has 144 blocks this season-- that's significantly more than McDyess, Blair, and Bonner combined. He also has a rebound per minute rate higher than Duncan or Blair. That's no small accomplishment.

[Mr Bones]

Dalembert's bball IQ is so low it makes Nazr Mohammed look like Robert Horry.

You have a great gift for not actually engaging in basketball conversations. I never said Dalembert was a basketball genius or anything else. He's a skilled defender/shotblocker/rebounder who alongside Duncan and Splitter would address glaring weaknesses. Let's have an actual conversation about it rather than responding with posts like "LOL thats stupid" or "LMAO your dumb!" or "that guy sucks." Otherwise, what's really the point of all of this?

[all_heart]

Unless the Spurs win it all, trading Parker for frontcourt help makes sense. Sure it'd be nice to have the best backcourt in the NBA but not when Timmy is holding down the paint on his own (we dont know what to expect with Tiago or if he'll even be here next season). You need to sacrifice some of that backcourt talent to help Timmy out, Parker is younger than Manu and more talented than Hill...he's the only one that will net us an all-star caliber big man.



For alot of these peeps it really is about loyalty, which is understandable. But its the smart move though it really is.

I've been saying the same thing for about 2 months. I like TP, I respect what he does and the things he's done for the Spurs since he's been here. My biggest concern is TD, the guy needs help out there. There is no guarantees w/Splitter, even if he comes over. I think trading TP for an all star PF/C would help the Spurs. Anybody remember what a healthy Lakers front court looks like?! I don't want TD to go out losing to those bastards because he didn't have help. No Thabeet, he hasn't proven shit.

[stéphane]

Yes, yes. He dominated the immortal Boobie Gibson. :rolleyes He also was +24 for that series while Manu was +48, but whatever. I never understood the argument why Duncan got Finals MVP in '05 just because he was the team's best player, even if he didn't have the best stats, but everyone just smiled and nodded when Tony got it in '07. How does that make sense?

Also, if you remember the '07 playoffs at all (which you clearly don't), every critical road game the team won, they won because of Manu (Games 3 and 4 at Denver, game 5 at Phoenix, game 4 at Utah). But yeah, let's focus on the sweep at the end against a completely mismatched Cavs team.

roycrikside is reaching new level of stupidity. If you're saying such crap about the 05 finals MVP you obviously weren't part of this board at that time.
And concerning the second highlighted sentence, you suggest that the first three rounds have something to do with the finals MVP trophy? ...OK
Between being favorites in a series and sweeping their ass there's a HUGE difference. Tony was dominating this serie and getting to in the paint at will. Ever heard of team defense once in your life? The spurs do not run iso for their guards if you didn't notice. They run the pick'n roll how's the PG domination is solely linked to his defensive matchup?
Dude you should really stop making yourself look dumb and claiming that you know how the old posters here think when you weren't there and have obviously no clue.

[L.I.T]

Parker may shred the Western conference, but a better question is will his team win with him at the reigns?

Obviously not. They never have before.

[timvpimp]

Dalembert's bball IQ is so low it makes Nazr Mohammed look like Robert Horry.
Although Pop's strategies are often too complex for rednecks to digest well, I don't think a menial center also needs to learn so much before he can suit the Spurs system. Like you said Nazr wasn't a smart guy either but he still had a span of brightness with Spurs, and I believe Dalembert can too.

[L.I.T]

You have a great gift for not actually engaging in basketball conversations. I never said Dalembert was a basketball genius or anything else. He's a skilled defender/shotblocker/rebounder who alongside Duncan and Splitter would address glaring weaknesses. Let's have an actual conversation about it rather than responding with posts like "LOL thats stupid" or "LMAO your dumb!" or "that guy sucks." Otherwise, what's really the point of all of this?

1. Dalembert has such a limited basketball IQ that it retards the use of his natural gifts. He is a pretty poor team defender and, thus, would never be able to pick up, much less master, the Spurs system. Richard Jefferson and Antonio Mcdyess, two players who were well-regarded IQ wise, are still struggling to understand their place in the system.

Granted, he blocks shots, but that's about it. On a run-and-gun free flowing type team, he could be effective. In a structured system like the Spurs, he'd likely be pretty much worthless. I'm fairly certain that Mahinmi could approximate what Dalembert would bring to the Spurs. And I've never been much of a Mahinmi booster.

2. He makes 12.2 million next year. As much hate as there is on this board over Richard Jefferson, I would prefer RJeffs contract over Dalemberts.

3. Dalembert is inconsistent, prone to going long stretches where he is disinterested and distracted.

[Mr Bones]

Granted, he blocks shots, but that's about it.

I think you are ignoring the fact that he also rebounds at a higher rate than Duncan, Blair, McDyess, and Bonner. Also, the original trade idea included Jrue Holiday and Dalembert, and Holiday shoots 40% from 3 point land and is an excellent defender.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

So what you're saying is if we had David Robinson and got Tim Duncan we should have traded David Robinson :tu

:lol well played

[Cry Havoc]

yes, i think if we make the right moves we will be a better team without him. Of course AT this moment were a better team with him playing in some rotation as long as we have him of course we need him! but what im saying is we need to weigh our option s out with him for the overall future of this team.
He was built for a different spurs team, and i think hes over pop screaming at him like he hes a 19yr old rookie, and not getting the recognition he "deserves" i mean hes a different breed than the average spurs players. i used to stick up fot the guy when my friends hated him, and now i just cant believe some of the things this guy has said as of late.

Someone needs to say this:

You don't know dick about what a healthy Tony Parker can do. He would destroy George Hill in every facet of the game. Every single one. The sole exception perhaps being 3s.

In the playoffs, you want your best players on the floor. If Tony and Hill are both healthy, I want Parker getting 34+ minutes. He's a top 4 PG guard in the league when he's 100%, and you want to run him in as a sub for a guy who's just a "decent" point?

The "what have you done for me lately" attitude that so many Spurs "fans" have is pathetic.

[L.I.T]

I think you are ignoring the fact that he also rebounds at a higher rate than Duncan, Blair, McDyess, and Bonner. Also, the original trade idea included Jrue Holiday and Dalembert, and Holiday shoots 40% from 3 point land and is an excellent defender.

Jrue Holiday is a rookie and has not proven he can be a lead guard on a team. Essentially, you're advocating trading an All-Star top 5 point guard for an over-paid, inconsistent and ill-equipped center who can't play team defense and a rookie point guard who averaged 8 points, 2.6 boards, 3.5 assists and 2 TOs in 24 minutes a game.

By the way, his rebounding rate doesn't matter if he can't get on the floor because he can't pick up the system.

There are much cheaper options to approximate those two players skill sets than trading away a top 5 point guard and breaking up potentially one of the toughest and most versatile backcourts in the league.

[Mr Bones]

It's funny what an emotional issue this is for some posters... discussing a move that could potentially help the Spurs as a team doesn't make someone a Parker hater. I love Tony Parker, and think he's a great player. But the argument that Parker is a top 4 PG in the league kind of points to the issue-- those top 3 guys don't have rings because their respective teams have shortcomings in other areas. It has nothing to do with "hating".... I just don't think the Spurs as currently constructed have a good chance to topple the Lakers or the Cavs in a seven game series, and if they want to win another championship before Duncan retires, he needs help defensively on the inside.

[stéphane]

It's funny what an emotional issue this is for some posters... discussing a move that could potentially help the Spurs as a team doesn't make someone a Parker hater. I love Tony Parker, and think he's a great player. But the argument that Parker is a top 4 PG in the league kind of points to the issue-- those top 3 guys don't have rings because their respective teams have shortcomings in other areas. It has nothing to do with "hating".... I just don't think the Spurs as currently constructed have a good chance to topple the Lakers or the Cavs in a seven game series, and if they want to win another championship before Duncan retires, he needs help defensively on the inside.

So trading the youngest of your three All Stars makes a lot of sense...
You don't think we have a chance at beating the Cavs or Lakers? We haven't seen this current Spurs squad healthy (talking about the big three there) in playoff mode loose to these teams yet. How can you already dismiss their chances?

[Mr Bones]

Jrue Holiday is a rookie and has not proven he can be a lead guard on a team. Essentially, you're advocating trading an All-Star top 5 point guard for an over-paid, inconsistent and ill-equipped center who can't play team defense and a rookie point guard who averaged 8 points, 2.6 boards, 3.5 assists and 2 TOs in 24 minutes a game.

By the way, his rebounding rate doesn't matter if he can't get on the floor because he can't pick up the system.

There are much cheaper options to approximate those two players skill sets than trading away a top 5 point guard and breaking up potentially one of the toughest and most versatile backcourts in the league.

I actually like the Mayo/Thabeet option much better because both are locked in contractually through 2012. My main fear is that once Duncan is gone, Parker is too. Parker seems a little more enamored of glamour than Duncan or Ginobili and I wonder if he'll want to stay in San Antonio after 2011. What do you think the odds are of him staying, especially considering that he'll want something approaching a max contract? Is he the kind of guy you build a team around in the absence of Duncan?

[L.I.T]

I actually like the Mayo/Thabeet option much better because both are locked in contractually through 2012. My main fear is that once Duncan is gone, Parker is too. Parker seems a little more enamored of glamor than Duncan or Ginobili and I wonder if he'll want to stay in San Antonio after 2011. What do you think the odds are of him staying, especially considering that he'll want something approaching a max contract? Is he the kind of guy you build a team around in the absence of Duncan?

I think his preference would be to stay with the Spurs, if there is a plan in place. For all we know the Spurs plans may not involve TP. My instincts are that the Spurs are trying to build around TP on the fly.

Splitter, Hill, Blair, Hairston, Gist, Nando de Colo...all of the young talent they've been cultivating fits well around TP. But, the Spurs have left themselves an excellent out next season...only Hill/Blair/TD are signed past the 2011 season. If the talent acquisitions they've made don't pan out, I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see TD traded and TP sent on a sign and trade.

Also, don't forget the cap situation may change dramatically. The Spurs have also given themselves some flexibility. It could very well be that a max contract doesn't have the same hit as it does today.

Edit: For me, if the Spurs choose to trade TP it won't be for established stars. I could easily see them trading him later on to expedite the rebuilding process for young players and draft picks.

[G-Dawgg]

I'd take Dalembert on this team to bolster the interior defense ....for the right price of course!

[Josepatches_]

Those stats aren't perfect.

In the last month without Tony we had to play against Lakers (2 times),Cavs,Boston,Orlando....yes,we played against the nets too but overall it was the most difficult part of the season.I would like to see how many games we won against those teams with and without Parker.


Anyway those stats say that the team couldn't be worse without Tony.The fact is that the the number are a few better.

But I don't think those stats are the key to see how good the team is . You can win 90% of the games against teams with record <50% and you suck against the best teams.At the end those stats could be pretty good but the team isn't so good.

[romain.star]

Someone needs to say this:

You don't know dick about what a healthy Tony Parker can do. He would destroy George Hill in every facet of the game. Every single one. The sole exception perhaps being 3s.

In the playoffs, you want your best players on the floor. If Tony and Hill are both healthy, I want Parker getting 34+ minutes. He's a top 4 PG guard in the league when he's 100%, and you want to run him in as a sub for a guy who's just a "decent" point?

The "what have you done for me lately" attitude that so many Spurs "fans" have is pathetic.

+1
Great post as usual

[BillMc]

The truth is Pop is going to put Parker into the rotation and then starter's role. To me the question isn't so much how will Parker adopt to being a starter, but what will Hill and the other bench players be like without Manu?

[spursrocks]

i like parker BUT...
he is slower, not the same when he won his finals MVP. now that he is slower, he is a defensive liability.
he just came of an hand injury so his jump shot will be affected. and he cant shoot the 3.
he depends mainly on his speed, which he doesnt have right now.
SO..
continue to start Hill, gino, dick, dice, and duncan.
hill on the otherhand, can defend.(he defended kobe and kevin durant well, do you think parker can do that?)
hill can spot up for 3point shot. when manu drives he can find an open hill. but parker?
just let parker come of the bench. parker the 6th man.
if he cant accept that role, then he is IVERSON 2.0
period.

[Muser]

:lol at people thinking Parker hurts the Spurs, he's capable of getting 20 + ppg on any given night whilst shooting 50% from the field.

[spursrocks]

yeah, when parker gets 20ppg a night, dick, hill and manu will score less. parker can score no doubt but he is a defensive liability.

[spursrocks]

when parker scores 20ppg bad news for gino.

[sonic21]

i like parker BUT...

right

[L.I.T]

when parker scores 20ppg bad news for gino.

You're right, they've never been able to co-exist before.

[Muser]

You're right, they've never been able to co-exist before.

Those 3 Titles they won together must have just been a dream.

[spursrocks]

well i dont know why this season tony, gino and dick cant coexist.
i know those championship days tony and gino plays well together. but for the better of this team. just start hill over tony. stick with the line up that kick cleveland, boston, orlando and lakers ass. and that line up is hill, gino, dick, dice and duncan. and for your hero tony. let tony lead the 2nd unit

[spursrocks]

why do you prefer tony who cant defend and cant shoot 3? hill is better defender and spot up 3pointer. we cant rely on parker now that he is slower and his jump shot is just so-so. defense wins championships, and hill is the defensive point guard we want to be at the starting five. tony is at best should lead the 2nd unit

[Muser]

This dude is like the anti ducks, just as retarded but he hates TP.

[MoSpur]

I can't wait until the first thread that blames Tony Parker for a Spurs loss. People on here are funny like that. The Spurs play different when Tony Parker isn't playing. However, I don't think its any better or worse. Just different. Winning is all that matters. The team was playing a lot better and starting to gel when Parker got hurt and Pop had to make ANOTHER lineup change.

People saw that and saw the success the team was having and thought to themselves that the reason behind that was because Parker wasn't playing. The team was already playing good before he got hurt.

[it's me]

All stats with and without him are almost identical….. the difference is the teams we played during this stretch and the pressure we faced, now that we would get this good with Tony playing during this stretch… unfortunately, we will never know, we just gotto be thankful the man is back, and probably what happened during this last month is a lesson for us and for him….. I expect him to play extremely well, call it pride.

[Pauleta14]

well i dont know why this season tony, gino and dick cant coexist.
i know those championship days tony and gino plays well together. but for the better of this team. just start hill over tony. stick with the line up that kick cleveland, boston, orlando and lakers ass. and that line up is hill, gino, dick, dice and duncan. and for your hero tony. let tony lead the 2nd unit


why do you prefer tony who cant defend and cant shoot 3? hill is better defender and spot up 3pointer. we cant rely on parker now that he is slower and his jump shot is just so-so. defense wins championships, and hill is the defensive point guard we want to be at the starting five. tony is at best should lead the 2nd unit


:wow:wow:wow:wow:wow:wow:wow:wow

:lol:lol:lol:lol WTF ???

[lefty]

Parker sucks :D

[stéphane]

Parker sucks :D

lefty, bro, your sig matches so bad your posts :lol

[Doe]

Some interesting points this thread brings up. Mainly that George Hill can do a more than adequate job as back up PG in the future. It also goes to show that George is almost as good as an 80% Parker, he's not in the same league as 100% TP.

Another great thing about the injuries has been Hill's ability to play with Manu. Someone else brought it up, but going back to last year and early this year Hill did not play with any aggression with Manu, although he did well with Tony. If this holds up, it'll be great going forward that we can get an aggressive Hill with either player.

I said it in another thread a few days ago, but if we can get Manu at his current level and TP close to his 09 level, this team has a deep run in them (hopefully into the month of June, deep).

[L.I.T]

well i dont know why this season tony, gino and dick cant coexist.
i know those championship days tony and gino plays well together. but for the better of this team. just start hill over tony. stick with the line up that kick cleveland, boston, orlando and lakers ass. and that line up is hill, gino, dick, dice and duncan. and for your hero tony. let tony lead the 2nd unit

Hill is out until the playoffs. Good to know you're advocating starting Temple over TP. :toast

The TP/Manu/RJeff/Dice/TD lineup is going to likely be the 4th quarter crunch time line-up; mainly because it's their best lineup. And, that group has never really had a chance to work together when all are healthy. It is imperative that they become comfortable with each other.


why do you prefer tony who cant defend and cant shoot 3? hill is better defender and spot up 3pointer. we cant rely on parker now that he is slower and his jump shot is just so-so. defense wins championships, and hill is the defensive point guard we want to be at the starting five. tony is at best should lead the 2nd unit

Hill is remarkably overrated on defense here. He has the tools to be a great defender, but he's not there yet. And even this year, arguably at less than 80% effectiveness TP still rarely got thrashed on the defensive end; routinely outplaying opposing PGs. Hill has given up some huge games to opposing PGs.

Damn that commercial was right: Chicks do dig the long-ball. Maybe this explains why some Spurs fans hate TP.



This dude is like the anti ducks, just as retarded but he hates TP.

Well fuck. That explains the headache after reading his post. Moving on.

[SpursRulez4eVeR]

i don't think there is question that the spurs are better when manu handles the ball and make plays as of now....this is why tony come off the bench to lead the bench makes so much sense.

[elbamba]

Last night should have given fans some hope that Tony could be playing like tony is capable of playing come playoff time. If that is the case and Hill comes back healthy, this team is a dangerous team.

[Dartherus]

Looking at the stats,the question begging to be asked is this: If Parker is considered to be such a big cog of the Spurs. how come his extended absence doesn't seem to have had a detrimental impact on the team? Stats are essentially the same with or without him so does this bolster the argument that he's expendable and maybe the Spurs could find a replacement who might have a bigger impact? Maybe a true pass-first, defensive PG with a true 3-point shot?
Or is it a case that Manu is simply playing out of his mind in Tony's absence and he won't be able to sustain this level of play without breaking down eventually so Tony's return is just what the Spurs need?
PArker has always been a pretty good scorer, and little else, lacks court vision, D and basketball IQ in general...

He had the luck that he played in a team where Tim and Manu were mainly team players who would never hesitate in sacrifizing their stats for the sake of the team....that was seen when PArker got the finals MVP due to a mismatch...Parker was the indicated to score back then, and he did and won the MVP....

IMHO, the scoring almost one-dimensional play of PArker can be replaced by another scoring PG with no great loss for SPurs, but players like Tim or Manu, who have an extremedly high Basbektball IQ, are so competitive and with the team as the first priority, are likely to be more difficult to replace in NBA, and their absence due to injury (wether they don't play or play at a very lower level because fo injury) is far more noticed for ANY team...

In short, you can replace Parker with any scoring PG and it won't be noticed, try to replace the best Tim or Manu by a good scoring PF or SG and imagine the outcome...

[Brazil]

Is there a coalition of <1000 posts guys hating parker ?

[dbestpro]

I like the offense he brought from the bench when Bonner and Mason are clanging away from three. He can really make a huge difference with the bench group when he is fully back.

[sonic21]

Is there a coalition of <1000 posts guys hating parker ?

just haters afraid to use their main usernames?

[it's me]

just haters afraid to use their main usernames?

lol, you sure know about it ......

[waly.mg]

Heading into this season, many Spurs fans were talking about the reins being handed over from Tim Duncan to Tony Parker. However, after a slew of injuries combined with relatively poor play, a vocal minority of Spurs fans are talking quite differently: Are these Spurs better without Tony Parker?

The theory goes that since Parker is a scoring point guard, his skillset no longer meshes well with the more well-rounded roster, thus the Spurs are better with a more passive, defensive-minded player like George Hill running point guard and Manu Ginobili orchestrating the show.

I compared the numbers from the 26 games Parker has missed this season to the 50 games Parker has played in to see what the statistics have to say on this matter.


http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/3931/tp1ys.jpg

I'm honestly surprised the numbers are so close. Subjectively, the Spurs play a different brand of basketball without Parker. But statistically speaking, there really isn't much of a difference. With Parker, the Spurs have outscored the opponents by 5.49 points per 100 possessions. Without Parker, that number drops to 5.31.

Looking at those numbers, it isn't fair to say Parker has hurt the Spurs this season. It is fair, however, to say that Parker hasn't been much more of an asset this season than what San Antonio is getting from George Hill.

If you compare the Parker's advanced stats to Hill's advanced stats, the case against Parker becomes even more difficult to make.


http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/2905/tp2x.jpg

Overall, these number reinforce a few points. First of all, Hill should be commended for the job he has done filling in for Parker. He's had big shoes to fill and has done about as well as possible. The dropoff from Parker to Hill this season has been minimal. That said, if a constantly injured shell of what was supposed to be Tony Parker helped this team, I'm excited to see how much Parker can help once he's actually playing well.

In Fact, the problem is:

There are 50 Spurs with TP + GH games, and 26 Spurs - TP games

The Spurs always are better with both, than with GH alone
If you compare Spurs - TP games vs Spurs - GH, you have a point

[gilmor]

PArker has always been a pretty good scorer, and little else, lacks court vision, D and basketball IQ in general...

He had the luck that he played in a team where Tim and Manu were mainly team players who would never hesitate in sacrifizing their stats for the sake of the team....that was seen when PArker got the finals MVP due to a mismatch...Parker was the indicated to score back then, and he did and won the MVP....

IMHO, the scoring almost one-dimensional play of PArker can be replaced by another scoring PG with no great loss for SPurs, but players like Tim or Manu, who have an extremedly high Basbektball IQ, are so competitive and with the team as the first priority, are likely to be more difficult to replace in NBA, and their absence due to injury (wether they don't play or play at a very lower level because fo injury) is far more noticed for ANY team...

In short, you can replace Parker with any scoring PG and it won't be noticed, try to replace the best Tim or Manu by a good scoring PF or SG and imagine the outcome...

You will be bitterly surprised if Parker were to be traded to the Lakers and he can excel in that lineup..

[L.I.T]

PArker has always been a pretty good scorer, and little else, lacks court vision, D and basketball IQ in general...

He had the luck that he played in a team where Tim and Manu were mainly team players who would never hesitate in sacrifizing their stats for the sake of the team....that was seen when PArker got the finals MVP due to a mismatch...Parker was the indicated to score back then, and he did and won the MVP....

IMHO, the scoring almost one-dimensional play of PArker can be replaced by another scoring PG with no great loss for SPurs, but players like Tim or Manu, who have an extremedly high Basbektball IQ, are so competitive and with the team as the first priority, are likely to be more difficult to replace in NBA, and their absence due to injury (wether they don't play or play at a very lower level because fo injury) is far more noticed for ANY team...

In short, you can replace Parker with any scoring PG and it won't be noticed, try to replace the best Tim or Manu by a good scoring PF or SG and imagine the outcome...

Where so much-fail-that-you-don't-know-where-to-begin happens.

Ok...imagining...imaaaagining. Hey look at that. The result is about the same. In all three cases the Spurs are worse.

Oh and by the way, as great as Manu and TP are, their effect on the Spurs fortunes over a season is still not comparable to what Tim Duncan does for the Spurs.

[mountainballer]

Looking at those numbers, it isn't fair to say Parker has hurt the Spurs this season. It is fair, however, to say that Parker hasn't been much more of an asset this season than what San Antonio is getting from George Hill.

this could be a very interesting point to discuss, if it was possible to evaluate the Spurs situation and future WITHOUT all the "you hate Parker" "you love Parker" stuff.
fact is, the Spurs face some very very complex decisions this summer and it all starts with Manu and comes down to a scenario, that also involves Tony.
and it would be shortsighted to reduce the whole picture to a discussion about Tony the player, or even Tony the person.
(I assume most are Spurs fans in the first place and would accept any scenario that benefits the Spurs as a team)

question 1:
what if the limited financial scope of the Spurs force a decision between re signing Manu and trading Tony? (assuming that Tony is a highly tradeable player, any 3 times all star at 28 with only 1 contract year left is, as long as you don't ask for Chris Paul in return)

Manu firmly demonstrated how much the Spurs still are depending on his genius. of course Manu+Tony+Hill is better than Manu+Hill or Manu+Tony. but the answer will likely not be that easy. it will be (for example): Manu+Tony+Hill OR Tony+Hill+Splitter OR Manu+Hill+Splitter.
that's not all. it will likely be Manu+Tony+Hill OR Manu+Hill+Splitter+decent player Spurs get in return for Tony.
and THAT line up could be either better AND less expensive.
(and don't forget that Tony will be a FA in 2011 and there also isn't any guarantee he doesn't want to move on. maybe even to Hollywood)

just a guess scenario:
Spurs try to re sign Manu, but prefer a contract that ends 2012, like Tim's.
they will need to pay Manu bigger bucks per to get his signature as opposed to a longer term contract. let's say 2 years 25 million. Spurs will be deep in luxtax territory again. so small to no chance to get Splitter or other pieces to form a deep (contender) roster.
if they trade Tony for a package like cap relieve AND a decent player (and/or a young talent or a good pick) they might increase the overall chances of the Spurs.
(for example: Blazers. they will once more try to upgrade the point. could offer a package including Batum/Fernandez, Przybilla/Webster, picks/rights. sure, some fillers are needed to make it work, maybe a 3rd team, but it is doable, if team want that deal)

so or so, I can't see the Spurs NOT explore trade scenarios involving Tony. and it won't be because they don't like him any more, it will be because they now know that there is an alternative that obviously works.

question:
if you can chose between this two top 10 rotations, which one do you take:
Tony-Manu-Hill-RJ-Hairston-Bogans (re signed) - Tim-Dice-Blair-Bonner (re signed)
Hill-Manu-Batum-RJ-Webster-Hairston-Tim-Splitter-Dice-Blair

[YoMamaIsCallin]

Let me go back to the original question as future trade discussions are getting us off track.

Are the Spurs better with or without Tony Parker? (and some stats of the Spurs with and without Parker)

My answer: obviously, yes, you want to have Tony Parker, if the choice is between having him or not having him with no other factors.

The stats really don't mean anything. What's important is that you have one more player who can create his own offense and carry a team when the need arises. That takes a big load off of the others.

The Spurs normal game plan is for Tony to run the team for 3 quarters plus, with Manu heading up the 2nd unit. Then Manu takes over at the end of the game.

Without Tony, Manu has to spend much more energy and increase his chances of being injured. This is not a winning strategy over the long run of the regular season.

[Mark in Austin]

It seems to me that the Spurs current hot streak is a little like fools gold. All those arguing that Parker isn't needed haven't stopped to consider the fact that Manu is carrying this team out of necessity as much as ability. If he was forced to do this for a full season he'd break down. Sure, if I had to chose one player to win or lose one game, Manu would be the choice; but that really ignores the reality of the NBA season.

Pop realized a long time ago that Manu was best used sparingly in order to preserve his health. In that situation, you need somebody to put up points on this team and Tony is the best option for that.

As timvp himself acknowledged, the numbers he provided don't tell the whole story because they are comparing a healthy Hill to a banged up Parker.

The fact that Jefferson, Blair, and Hill seem to have better chemistry with Manu (for whatever reason) does not change the fact that Manu cannot carry a team for 96 games. Hill might be a great PG in a complimentary role to Manu - but make no mistake, Hill is not doing for the team what Parker did last year. Manu is.

[nkdlunch]

:rolleyes

the church of manu strikes again

[Jimcs50]

Heading into this season, many Spurs fans were talking about the reins being handed over from Tim Duncan to Tony Parker. However, after a slew of injuries combined with relatively poor play, a vocal minority of Spurs fans are talking quite differently: Are these Spurs better without Tony Parker?

The theory goes that since Parker is a scoring point guard, his skillset no longer meshes well with the more well-rounded roster, thus the Spurs are better with a more passive, defensive-minded player like George Hill running point guard and Manu Ginobili orchestrating the show.

I compared the numbers from the 26 games Parker has missed this season to the 50 games Parker has played in to see what the statistics have to say on this matter.


http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/3931/tp1ys.jpg

I'm honestly surprised the numbers are so close. Subjectively, the Spurs play a different brand of basketball without Parker. But statistically speaking, there really isn't much of a difference. With Parker, the Spurs have outscored the opponents by 5.49 points per 100 possessions. Without Parker, that number drops to 5.31.

Looking at those numbers, it isn't fair to say Parker has hurt the Spurs this season. It is fair, however, to say that Parker hasn't been much more of an asset this season than what San Antonio is getting from George Hill.

If you compare the Parker's advanced stats to Hill's advanced stats, the case against Parker becomes even more difficult to make.


http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/2905/tp2x.jpg

Overall, these number reinforce a few points. First of all, Hill should be commended for the job he has done filling in for Parker. He's had big shoes to fill and has done about as well as possible. The dropoff from Parker to Hill this season has been minimal. That said, if a constantly injured shell of what was supposed to be Tony Parker helped this team, I'm excited to see how much Parker can help once he's actually playing well.



Stats are meaningless here.

Spurs are playing at a higher level right now than previous 5 months, it is just coincidental that TP has been injured during the Spurs resurgence.

The Spurs will need a healthy TP if they have any chance of going deep in playoffs.

[Walton Buys Off Me]

Good analysis but it doesn't speak to the Spurs' record without Parker.

Is it a coincidence that since Tony went down we've turned our season around, Richard Jefferson has become much more involved in the offense and Manu Ginobili's become the best player in the NBA?

A more complete story would highlight the numbers of individual players like Hill, Ginobili and Jefferson playing with Parker vs. without and speak to the team's record in both scenarios.

I'm not in favour of letting go of Parker but the bottom line is that he didn't come into this season in shape and his injuries and play reflect it.

[ohmwrecker]

This analysis is cool and all, but all you need to understand that a healthy Tony Parker is a crucial weapon in the Spurs post season arsenal is a pair of eyes and a minimal amount of brain damage.

[timvp]

Finally, I don't think you should've broken the stats up as the 50 games Tony has played and the 26 he didn't. I think the only data you should've used is the numbers after Tony broke his hand. That's the team we've been watching of late. The other ten games he missed are irrelevant. Everyone was playing bad back then.

That's part of the point. If you are going to eliminate the first ten games Parker missed due to "everyone playing bad", how many of Parker's 50 do you eliminate for the same reason? You start trying to handpick the games and the numbers loose even more credibility.

[TJastal]

parker- advantage- speed, one man fast break, shoots 15-20ft
sucks at- cant shoot 3s, not a good defender, coming of an injury(not the same 2-3yrs ago)
george hill- longer, better defender, mesh well with gino and dick, importantly can shoot 3point shot.
gino pick n roll duncan, drives finds george hill open at the 3point spot, hill for 3(hill can take it)
imagine- gino driving to the lane finds open tony. tony will usually be open 20ft but is too near. tony usually will just drive again forcing manu to back out and spot up.
those who thinks gino will still take control when parker gets back is dreaming. tony will definitly command the floor. manu again will just spot up.
book it.
those who loves parker so much just keep dreaming, parker IS NOT THE SAME 2-3YRS AGO! he is a step slower, liability on defense and cannot shoot the 3BALL.
he just came off an injury, do you think he will be a factor?

if i were POP, if george returns, continue to start george, manu, dick, dice, and duncan. and let tony lead the 2nd unit with bonner, RMJ, blair, and bogans
but tony is a bone head, he wont accept the bench role. tony iverson 2.0

+1

Pretty much all that. The Hill/Manu/RJ/Dice/Duncan starting lineup needs to stay as is and Parker needs to accept a bench role for the rest of the year to give the spurs the best chance at another ring. We need to take full advantage of Manu's unexpected resurgence and that means no Tony Parker in the starting lineup. Those that think Manu will still get his touches and be as effective with Parker back in the starting lineup are DREAMING.

After the season is over the whole situation can be re-evaluated. I think there is a fairly good chance that Parker will request to be traded. In which case the spurs might be able to land a quality big man. Unless of course Parker would be willing to take on a 6th man role similar to Jason Terry. I highly doubt Parker's ego would accept this however, as spursrocks mentioned.

The only other alternative for Pop to try would be to re-construct the team around Tony Parker by getting rid of Jefferson's expiring for a few spot up shooters like Wally Scerbiak or Trevor Ariza that would work better alongside him.

[Brazil]

^What do you know about TP ego ?

[TJastal]

It seems to me that the Spurs current hot streak is a little like fools gold. All those arguing that Parker isn't needed haven't stopped to consider the fact that Manu is carrying this team out of necessity as much as ability. If he was forced to do this for a full season he'd break down. Sure, if I had to chose one player to win or lose one game, Manu would be the choice; but that really ignores the reality of the NBA season.

Pop realized a long time ago that Manu was best used sparingly in order to preserve his health. In that situation, you need somebody to put up points on this team and Tony is the best option for that.

As timvp himself acknowledged, the numbers he provided don't tell the whole story because they are comparing a healthy Hill to a banged up Parker.

The fact that Jefferson, Blair, and Hill seem to have better chemistry with Manu (for whatever reason) does not change the fact that Manu cannot carry a team for 96 games. Hill might be a great PG in a complimentary role to Manu - but make no mistake, Hill is not doing for the team what Parker did last year. Manu is.

I love how "for whatever reason" has become the standby moniker that TP homers keep using every time they have to admit that everyone on the team plays more productively alongside Manu. :lol

[Spursfan 87]

Manu's starting, that's has been the key for the Spurs recent success.

[Mark in Austin]

I love how "for whatever reason" has become the standby moniker that TP homers keep using every time they have to admit that everyone on the team plays more productively alongside Manu. :lol

My point is I don't care why they are playing better now - Manu cannot carry the load for an extended period of time, (do you not remember the injuries?) so Parker is needed.

If Manu is injured again, this team is screwed.

How is that being a TP homer? That's being a realist.

[cheguevara]

Heading into this season, many Spurs fans were talking about the reins being handed over from Tim Duncan to Tony Parker. However, after a slew of injuries combined with relatively poor play, a vocal minority of Spurs fans are talking quite differently: Are these Spurs better without Tony Parker?

The theory goes that since Parker is a scoring point guard, his skillset no longer meshes well with the more well-rounded roster, thus the Spurs are better with a more passive, defensive-minded player like George Hill running point guard and Manu Ginobili orchestrating the show.

I compared the numbers from the 26 games Parker has missed this season to the 50 games Parker has played in to see what the statistics have to say on this matter.


http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/3931/tp1ys.jpg

I'm honestly surprised the numbers are so close. Subjectively, the Spurs play a different brand of basketball without Parker. But statistically speaking, there really isn't much of a difference. With Parker, the Spurs have outscored the opponents by 5.49 points per 100 possessions. Without Parker, that number drops to 5.31.

Looking at those numbers, it isn't fair to say Parker has hurt the Spurs this season. It is fair, however, to say that Parker hasn't been much more of an asset this season than what San Antonio is getting from George Hill.

If you compare the Parker's advanced stats to Hill's advanced stats, the case against Parker becomes even more difficult to make.


http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/2905/tp2x.jpg

Overall, these number reinforce a few points. First of all, Hill should be commended for the job he has done filling in for Parker. He's had big shoes to fill and has done about as well as possible. The dropoff from Parker to Hill this season has been minimal. That said, if a constantly injured shell of what was supposed to be Tony Parker helped this team, I'm excited to see how much Parker can help once he's actually playing well.

Parker has been injury hit this season, so really this comparison is not necessary.

It's like wasting time comparing stats w/injured manu and w/out.

[InK]

This is all fine and dandy, but what kinda teams did we face since Tony went down? Its somethin different to have +5pts winning margin against the scrubs of the league and having +5pts winning margin after playing the lakers, cavs, boston, orlando etc....

The other thing is that Manu is just on fire lately, giving credit to Ghill and blaming Parker for this (at least implicitly) does not really seem like a fair thing to do.

So u got 2 anomalies here, and only 20 games sample to support a theory. Better just to watch games and go with ur gut then relaying on stats with so many atypical things happening.

[InK]

Parker has been injury hit this season, so really this comparison is not necessary.

It's like wasting time comparing stats w/injured manu and w/out.

Its really a discussion if an injured Parker is better then a healthy Ghill. And apperently its more or less the same thing if the trust the stats. So the logical thing would be to give Parker limited minutes? For health reasons?

[tothrowed]

men lie women lie numbers dont lie

[ohmwrecker]

I know what dude I am! I'm the dude playin' the dude disguised as another dude!

[oski1000]

TRADE HIM!!! He only plays for himself....:bang:bang

[Cant_Be_Faded]

ehhhhhhhh what a coincidence that ginobili playing one of those vintage total shit games in parker's first real minutes back

[DPG21920]

Manu had a really poor 3 quarters last night with TP barely playing. He looks tired.

[SequSpur]

watch a game and put down your calculator.

[lefty]

:lmao

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...6083114AArLoGH (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080226083114AArLoGH)





SF Dominique Wilkins
PF Walt Bellamy
C Patrick Ewing
SG World B. Free
PG Tony Parker




Response to JR:

****** the questions probably should have been rhetorical, I give you that. What I asked are in fact the criteria I used to name my starting 5. I wanted to justify why I thought players such as Iverson, Jordan and Bryant would not make my ALL-TIME BALL HOG First Team. I used assists averages on some like Bellamy & Ewing. Ewing has the worst assist average (1.9) of any so-called All-time great center. Numbers aren't everything, but they do mean something. In the case of Tony Parker. He passes the "least with the most". I've never seen a starting point guard with such a talented team...... Duncan, Ginobili, and a host of good spot up shooters....... pass the ball so little in all of my 32 years of watching basketball. The Spurs are hard to watch, but I do notice that in close 4th quarter action, quite often Parker is on the bench. I think even Popovich recognizes that the offense flows better without Parker in the game. I could go on, but I'll stop here.******

[ffadicted]

watch a game and put down your calculator.

+ 100000000

[Creation88]

i have my own compiled stats for Tony coming up. just need to get a good image of them.....i'll start a new thread.

[mogrovejo]

Where exactly did you guys get this "Manu can't play 36mpg through a season" myth? Popovich?

[Mikesatx]

Couple of thoughts: The three top teams in the league have Derek Fisher, Jameer Nelson and Daniel Gibson as their point guards. We had Avery Johnson lead our team in '99. Can anyone name a team that was carried by a point guard other than the Lakers who were led by Magic who also played a little center among other positions? I don't think this thread is about hating on Tony. It is about putting out our best team.

If Tony can find the form that put up a rediculous percentage of points in the paint than we are a better team with him. If all we get is jumpshots and shitty defense than I'll take George Hill with Manu controlling the ball.

To those that think that you need a significant post count to be considered knowledgeable about this team or basketball in general you can suck it. Your 30k posts tell me you should get off your ass and become a contributing member of society.

[duncan228]

Asked before the game how Parker has looked, coach Gregg Popovich said, “He’s still cute. “

[polandprzem]

Asked before the game how Parker has looked, coach Gregg Popovich said, “He’s still cute. “

:lmao

[ducks]

Where exactly did you guys get this "Manu can't play 36mpg through a season" myth? Popovich?

did you see him tonight
he made nash look like he was 20

[Mr Bones]

Couple of thoughts: The three top teams in the league have Derek Fisher, Jameer Nelson and Daniel Gibson as their point guards. We had Avery Johnson lead our team in '99. Can anyone name a team that was carried by a point guard other than the Lakers who were led by Magic who also played a little center among other positions? I don't think this thread is about hating on Tony. It is about putting out our best team.


The three best pure point guards in recent history are probably Nash, Kidd, and Stockton. Between the three of them they have zero rings. The two best point guards in the league right now are probably Chris Paul and Deron Williams. They both have slightly undersized power forwards on their teams, and again, so far, have no rings. The three best big men of this era are Duncan, Shaq, and KG. Between them, they have 9 rings. The Bulls, when they played through the winningest season ever, didn't even start a point guard-- they started two shooting guards in Jordan and Harper, and had Pippen bring the ball up court much of the time. The belief that a team absolutely needs a point guard who can score and accumulate assists is one of the great myths of basketball.

[TDMVPDPOY]

ball dominant players only hurt there teams production, but ppl dont really care when they win games, its only when you see them puttin up monster stats in loss games.....thats when fans question the player....are they ball dominant or overdoing certain things etc...

i think the same question was pop up for cp3 how he does everything on the hornets but when they lose games the fans come runnin out...

outside of parker we have probably 1-2 other players who can handle the ball play making abilities...its only a problem when all 3 of them are on the court at the same time, cause some players need touches to be effective and we all know who we prefer to have the ball in which players hands....

[The Truth #6]

this could be a very interesting point to discuss, if it was possible to evaluate the Spurs situation and future WITHOUT all the "you hate Parker" "you love Parker" stuff.
fact is, the Spurs face some very very complex decisions this summer and it all starts with Manu and comes down to a scenario, that also involves Tony.
and it would be shortsighted to reduce the whole picture to a discussion about Tony the player, or even Tony the person.
(I assume most are Spurs fans in the first place and would accept any scenario that benefits the Spurs as a team)

question 1:
what if the limited financial scope of the Spurs force a decision between re signing Manu and trading Tony? (assuming that Tony is a highly tradeable player, any 3 times all star at 28 with only 1 contract year left is, as long as you don't ask for Chris Paul in return)

Manu firmly demonstrated how much the Spurs still are depending on his genius. of course Manu+Tony+Hill is better than Manu+Hill or Manu+Tony. but the answer will likely not be that easy. it will be (for example): Manu+Tony+Hill OR Tony+Hill+Splitter OR Manu+Hill+Splitter.
that's not all. it will likely be Manu+Tony+Hill OR Manu+Hill+Splitter+decent player Spurs get in return for Tony.
and THAT line up could be either better AND less expensive.
(and don't forget that Tony will be a FA in 2011 and there also isn't any guarantee he doesn't want to move on. maybe even to Hollywood)

just a guess scenario:
Spurs try to re sign Manu, but prefer a contract that ends 2012, like Tim's.
they will need to pay Manu bigger bucks per to get his signature as opposed to a longer term contract. let's say 2 years 25 million. Spurs will be deep in luxtax territory again. so small to no chance to get Splitter or other pieces to form a deep (contender) roster.
if they trade Tony for a package like cap relieve AND a decent player (and/or a young talent or a good pick) they might increase the overall chances of the Spurs.
(for example: Blazers. they will once more try to upgrade the point. could offer a package including Batum/Fernandez, Przybilla/Webster, picks/rights. sure, some fillers are needed to make it work, maybe a 3rd team, but it is doable, if team want that deal)

so or so, I can't see the Spurs NOT explore trade scenarios involving Tony. and it won't be because they don't like him any more, it will be because they now know that there is an alternative that obviously works.

question:
if you can chose between this two top 10 rotations, which one do you take:
Tony-Manu-Hill-RJ-Hairston-Bogans (re signed) - Tim-Dice-Blair-Bonner (re signed)
Hill-Manu-Batum-RJ-Webster-Hairston-Tim-Splitter-Dice-Blair

Excellent post. There's logic in all of this. I don't know if Portland is happy with Andre Miller as their point, but there are a lot of pieces on this team that could help the Spurs in a trade.

TiMVP's statistics can be read many ways. To me, the comparison isn't that Hill is actually better than Tony (of course not) but that Hill wasn't really that much worse this year. And given that, if the team can save money and get better than they were this year through trade and free agency, then I think its the smart move to make.

The playoffs will give us more info to use and analyze. Given Pop's love for Hill, I don't think it's unlikey that this is the direction they will head.

[relic]

I don't understand, how fans state parker can't play with manu what the Fu$k they won three championships. The spurs aren't better without parker or manu or duncan thats our bread and butter. What we're missing is roll players we need horry, barry, elson, jackson.....I dont know if having hill, jefferson, blair is going to be enough. Tickets go on sale friday for the first round see you there.

[TD 21]

this could be a very interesting point to discuss, if it was possible to evaluate the Spurs situation and future WITHOUT all the "you hate Parker" "you love Parker" stuff.
fact is, the Spurs face some very very complex decisions this summer and it all starts with Manu and comes down to a scenario, that also involves Tony.
and it would be shortsighted to reduce the whole picture to a discussion about Tony the player, or even Tony the person.
(I assume most are Spurs fans in the first place and would accept any scenario that benefits the Spurs as a team)

question 1:
what if the limited financial scope of the Spurs force a decision between re signing Manu and trading Tony? (assuming that Tony is a highly tradeable player, any 3 times all star at 28 with only 1 contract year left is, as long as you don't ask for Chris Paul in return)

Manu firmly demonstrated how much the Spurs still are depending on his genius. of course Manu+Tony+Hill is better than Manu+Hill or Manu+Tony. but the answer will likely not be that easy. it will be (for example): Manu+Tony+Hill OR Tony+Hill+Splitter OR Manu+Hill+Splitter.
that's not all. it will likely be Manu+Tony+Hill OR Manu+Hill+Splitter+decent player Spurs get in return for Tony.
and THAT line up could be either better AND less expensive.
(and don't forget that Tony will be a FA in 2011 and there also isn't any guarantee he doesn't want to move on. maybe even to Hollywood)

just a guess scenario:
Spurs try to re sign Manu, but prefer a contract that ends 2012, like Tim's.
they will need to pay Manu bigger bucks per to get his signature as opposed to a longer term contract. let's say 2 years 25 million. Spurs will be deep in luxtax territory again. so small to no chance to get Splitter or other pieces to form a deep (contender) roster.
if they trade Tony for a package like cap relieve AND a decent player (and/or a young talent or a good pick) they might increase the overall chances of the Spurs.
(for example: Blazers. they will once more try to upgrade the point. could offer a package including Batum/Fernandez, Przybilla/Webster, picks/rights. sure, some fillers are needed to make it work, maybe a 3rd team, but it is doable, if team want that deal)

so or so, I can't see the Spurs NOT explore trade scenarios involving Tony. and it won't be because they don't like him any more, it will be because they now know that there is an alternative that obviously works.

question:
if you can chose between this two top 10 rotations, which one do you take:
Tony-Manu-Hill-RJ-Hairston-Bogans (re signed) - Tim-Dice-Blair-Bonner (re signed)
Hill-Manu-Batum-RJ-Webster-Hairston-Tim-Splitter-Dice-Blair

Why do people think that the Spurs have to trade Parker to facilitate the Ginobili extension? Essentially, Ginobili received roughly a $3 million dollar raise (per year). Here's how I think the summer will go down...

- One of Splitter or McDyess will be a Spur; if it's Splitter, he could make up to $5.5 ($1 million more than McDyess)

- Bonner and Bogans will be re-signed for similar money to what they're currently making

- Mason will not be re-signed; his spot to be filled by a minimum salaried player, which accounts for Ginobili's $3 million raise (roughly)

- The 1st round pick will replace Mahinmi's salary slot

- The 2nd round pick, if it's not an international player that stays overseas, will compete with Hairston, Temple, Jerrells, Gee (maybe a few other D-League/undrafted playes are added to this group for training camp) for probably three roster spot

- Keep in mind this is all roughly, but the end result is that the Spurs could add no more than $1-2 million to the payroll

How do they facilitate signing Parker to an extension next season? Easy. They either trade Jefferson at the '11 trade deadline, don't re-sign him or re-sign him for roughly half of what he's currently making. Let's say Parker pulls a Ginobili this year, bounces back healthy, flashes his '09 form and ends up with a $2 million dollar raise (per year). In this scenario, the Spurs would shave roughly $5 million off their payroll the following summer.

I don't buy this notion that Hill's emergence makes Parker expendable. There's a lot of mileage on Parker and Ginobili and Pop will want to hold them to 32-34 and 28-30 mpg going forward. Hill can be the third guard and easily get 30 mpg backing either up and playing alongside them at times.

[roycrikside]

That's part of the point. If you are going to eliminate the first ten games Parker missed due to "everyone playing bad", how many of Parker's 50 do you eliminate for the same reason? You start trying to handpick the games and the numbers loose even more credibility.

First off, it's "lose" not "loose." Secondly, I don't need you of all people to talk to me about credibility. Guy posts one day a month and he thinks he's doing everyone a big favor by deigning to write brilliant opinions like "Boy, that Manu Ginobili sure has been pretty good lately, huh?"

Thanks bud. I don't know how the board survives without you. :downspin:

[Brazil]

First off, it's "lose" not "loose." Secondly, I don't need you of all people to talk to me about credibility. Guy posts one day a month and he thinks he's doing everyone a big favor by deigning to write brilliant opinions like "Boy, that Manu Ginobili sure has been pretty good lately, huh?"

Thanks bud. I don't know how the board survives without you. :downspin:

:lmao solid post

[RandomGuy]

It is a total myth that we can win a title with George Hill as PG. It is a total fantasy at this point, it's not a myth win Tony Parker. If you are going to trade one of them then the one you trade is George Hill, and not the HOF PG.

Salut.