Who was a better player at their peak: Manu or Ray Allen?

[LkrFan]

I got Ray Ray on this one.

[Killakobe81]

Career Ray allen no question. Peak, I still lean towards Ray ... Manu has a had a couple of really good PER seasons (a stat I hate but still) that surpassed Ray.

But as clutch as Manu is ....at times he has pulled some Favre's and some Romo's too ...

Ray allen has been one of the most consistently good shooters in NBA history and even at his advanced age has some "sneaky good" athleticism. Ray has been more durable.

Again, if it's close, 3>1 ... but is it really all that close?
As an efficent scorer (just like in the NAsh vs. Kidd debate) Id rather have Ray, but much like with Kidd stats cant tell the WHOLE story with a competitor like Manu. I say Ray but I have so much respect for Manu. he has been the 2nd best player on 3 tittle teams and on one of those some argue he was the best.

Ray is the better pure scorer, shooter (FTs, 3's and mid-range) at his peak had more hops than Manu and was faster.

Manu was the better defender with great intangibles.

[Roger Freemason Jr.]

As much as I love Manu, I have to say Ray as well. But it's really really close. But at this point in their careers, I'd take Manu any day.

[Leetonidas]

Kinda hard comparing a 2nd fiddle to a #1 option in his prime. Ginobili has always been a beastly 2nd option and I don't think he would be able to keep himself out of harms way if he played more than 30mpg. It's probably close but Ray has the accolades and did decently in his tenure as his team's main man. I'd rather have Ginobili because of his intangibles but Ray is probably the better player because of his silky smooth shot. Shit is a thing of beauty. :wow

[JMarkJohns]

This is impossible to debate accurately because Manu has never been asked to be a #1 option on a team, at least not in his prime.

Manu would likely handle the pressure well, but the pressure is pretty great, and with his nagging inability to stay healthy, an expanded role could have limited overall impact due to an accumulation of too many minutes and having to carry more of the burden.

As it stands now, Allen was better at what he did great than Manu, and was such while being the focus of opposing defenses and alongside some severely limited/flawed teammates, another issue Manu hasn't really had to face.

[JMarkJohns]

Kinda hard comparing a 2nd fiddle to a #1 option in his prime. Ginobili has always been a beastly 2nd option and I don't think he would be able to keep himself out of harms way if he played more than 30mpg. It's probably close but Ray has the accolades and did decently in his tenure as his team's main man. I'd rather have Ginobili because of his intangibles but Ray is probably the better player because of his silky smooth shot. Shit is a thing of beauty. :wow

Beat me to it.

[Killakobe81]

This is impossible to debate accurately because Manu has never been asked to be a #1 option on a team, at least not in his prime.

Manu would likely handle the pressure well, but the pressure is pretty great, and with his nagging inability to stay healthy, an expanded role could have limited overall impact due to an accumulation of too many minutes and having to carry more of the burden.

As it stands now, Allen was better at what he did great than Manu, and was such while being the focus of opposing defenses and alongside some severely limited/flawed teammates, another issue Manu hasn't really had to face.

Great points but it's a sport debate notan exact science ...:lol

I have argued Nique vs. worthy Mchale vs. Malone and those same issues arise. If they were equally great players playng with equal supporting casts, there wouldnt be much debate the person with more success would be declared superior. But since the supporting casts will ALWAYS be different the debates around players are ALWAYS like this.

[JMarkJohns]

It's just hard to really debate accurately (which is most of the fun) when one player never had the opportunities of the other, but, inversely, never bore the same weight of leadership/expectation/production.

Oh, and Nique alongside Magic devastates. Worthy was a very good player, but nowhere near the talent or player Wilkins was.

McHale vs. Malone is interesting, as while the latter was his team's leading scorer, he wasn't the true facilitator of the offense, so while roles were a bit different as far as being the #1 or #2 options, as individual players, the talent is elite and the impact significant. That would be fun, although I don't think that many on this board saw McHale.

[Dex]

Manu would likely handle the pressure well, but the pressure is pretty great, and with his nagging inability to stay healthy, an expanded role could have limited overall impact due to an accumulation of too many minutes and having to carry more of the burden.


Bingo. Something to consider....Last season, Manu was probably more of the focal point of the Spurs offense than ever before. Many would say he was the leader of last season, which resulted in the Spurs being top of the standings for nearly the whole season and earned them the top seed in the West.

Manu hurts his arm in the last game (:bang:bang:bang), his effectiveness is stifled, and the Spurs end up getting trashed by the eight seed. Coincidence? I think not.

If Manu could stay healthy, I think his career easily rivals Allen's, maybe even Kobe's. Unfortunately, staying healthy seems to be one of the few things Ginobili does not do well.

[Brazil]

Maybe it's a wrong impression but for me prime Manu is a better all around player than Allen. Passing, defense, rebounds, hustle, other intangibles for Manu... Allen is the better shooter JS, FTs and 3's. Both are clutch. So it basically depends on what your team needs. Both choices are ok.

[baseline bum]

Gotta go with Shuttlesworth here in a landslide, mainly because Manu has never been able to play 40 minutes a game. He was a hell of a #1 option in the 04 Olympics though.

[mavs>spurs]

allen got bigger numbers but manu was more of a team playa and helped his team much more. allen as da #1 didn't do shit 4 his team while manu being the #1 of argentinian bball team won da olympics gold medal in 04, on the same tournament where da dream team led by allen/iverson/duncan only got a bronze. manu is unstoppable when hes on fire tbh u have no fuckin solution to him, allen could score 60+ in a game but you can make him struggle alot if you have such a dirty scrappy D specialist like bruce bowen, and allen doesn't know how to lead his team to a W when it really matters

[BlackSwordsMan]

Rogue at his peak >

[Barfunk]

"As a number one option, Ginobili would average 25ppg." - Charles Barkley paraphrased, circa 2004-2008.

Would like to hear some more takes on this thread, sans the "lol faggot" takes.

[lefty]

Ray is a better shooter

Yep, that's the only thing he has on Manu

[badfish22]

Ray is a better shooter

Yep, that's the only thing he has on Manu

Off-ball movement
Durability

[lefty]

Off-ball movement
Durability

True

But again, Manu is not an outside shooter like Ray, so he doesn't need to do that

[HarlemHeat37]

I wouldn't want either of them as my #1, but if I had to pick, it would be Ray Allen, simply due to potential durability issues..however, I have always found Ray Allen to be overrated..he was never a capable passer, he was never more than an average defensive player, he wasn't a standout rebounder at his position..he was always an elite scorer, I would never take that away from him, but he lacked the all-around game that is required to lead an offense IMO..

Ginobili is much more capable at making an impact in multiple facets of the game..he was an underrated defender in his prime, he has always been one of the best passing swingmen in the NBA, he was better at getting to the FT line than Ray Allen..

[DAF86]

Ray has been more durable.

Manu was an all-star last season at age 33, that's beign durable to me.


As an efficent scorer Id rather have Ray.

Ginobili pts per shot attempt - 1.4

Allen pts per shot attempt - 1.2


I heard a lot of people talking about Manu not beign a number one guy, well let me ask you this: In your opinion who was the Spurs best player last season? What was the Spurs record last season?

You want to tell me that the Spurs were a team oriented squad and didn't rely too much on one guy, well IMO team sports should be like that but let's consider that opinion as valid.

Do you remember the second half of the 2009/10 season or the entire 2007/2008 season? I think that proves that Ginobili is more than capable of leading a very good team as the number one guy.

The "durability" issue is all speculation, I'm sure Ginobili in his physical prime would have been able to play 35+ minutes per game without breaking.

[badfish22]

An theres the Argentinian opinion.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Manu was an all-star last season at age 33, that's beign durable to me.



Ginobili pts per shot attempt - 1.4

Allen pts per shot attempt - 1.2


I heard a lot of people talking about Manu not beign a number one guy, well let me ask you this: In your opinion who was the Spurs best player last season? What was the Spurs record last season?

You want to tell me that the Spurs were a team oriented squad and didn't rely too much on one guy, well IMO team sports should be like that but let's consider that opinion as valid.

Do you remember the second half of the 2009/10 season or the entire 2007/2008 season? I think that proves that Ginobili is more than capable of leading a very good team as the number one guy.

The "durability" issue is all speculation, I'm sure Ginobili in his physical prime would have been able to play 35+ minutes per game without breaking.
Sooooooooo I'm guessing you chose Manu tbh?

[picc84]

Ray was a better shooter, equal or better scorer, equal or better defender....and yet I can't see any team Ray has been on being worse with Manu on it.

Ray's ability to play more minutes at an effective level is a point in his favor.

Manu is a better playmaker, ballhandler, and definitely has the edge in intangibles. Despite Ray's scoring edge, I don't see the Sonics or Celtics being any worse with Manu, and I don't see the Spurs being any better with Ray.

Intangibles mean a lot with me, and Manu has them in spades. He's the kind of guy who just gives your team whatever you need, at the exact time you need it. Ray can go through bad shooting slumps in which he doesn't contribute anything else to the team. Even when Manu isn't shooting well he's still impacting the game.

Plus, you can put the ball in Manu's hands in crunchtime and expect him to make plays. Ray, not so much. Although he is one of the best clutch shooters of all time. But Manu is a clutch playmaker. Slight difference.

I'll go with Manu....BARELY. This is as close a comparison as it gets.

[badfish22]

I heard a lot of people talking about Manu not beign a number one guy, well let me ask you this: In your opinion who was the Spurs best player last season?

Probably Manu. But they had a lot of good players instead of any #1 options and it showed in the playoffs.

[DAF86]

An theres the Argentinian opinion.

I posted that just to see your comment about it, tbh.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I see the 05 Sonics being worse with Manu as oppose to Ray just because for whatever reason that group of players meshed well, played way beyond its talent level, and replacing Allen with a comparable player might have fucked up whatever weird chemistry that team had.

With that said, I don't see any of those Milwaukee Bucks teams worse off with Manu, and since it's peak Ray vs. peak Manu the Celtics aren't really a part of the discussion since Ray Allen's best individual years weren't in Boston. I'd go with Manu by a hair but as Harlem said, neither one is a viable #1 option.

[badfish22]

I posted that just to see your comment about it, tbh.

:lol trying to pretend you would even think about not posting in a thread that speaks blasphemy against Manu or Messi.

[BRHornet45]

sons this one goes to Ray, but not by much

Manu deserves props for helping carry the Spurs over the last 4 or 5 seasons. In 2007 both Manu and Parker won that championship. In recent years Manu has been the man for the Spurs and the only reason they have been a playoff team.

[picc84]

Yeah, whoever it is its not by much. You really can't be wrong with either choice. Best argument I can see for Ray is that he plays more minutes at the same level. Who knows if Manu would go up or down with more playing time.

[Venti Quattro]

Jesus Shuttlesworth

[ElNono]

Ray's shot is just too automatic. I think Manu is probably better in most other categories (not substantially better, but just a bit above), but Allen's shot being so consistently good and so much better simply ends the debate, IMO.

[Killakobe81]

It's just hard to really debate accurately (which is most of the fun) when one player never had the opportunities of the other, but, inversely, never bore the same weight of leadership/expectation/production.

Oh, and Nique alongside Magic devastates. Worthy was a very good player, but nowhere near the talent or player Wilkins was.
McHale vs. Malone is interesting, as while the latter was his team's leading scorer, he wasn't the true facilitator of the offense, so while roles were a bit different as far as being the #1 or #2 options, as individual players, the talent is elite and the impact significant. That would be fun, although I don't think that many on this board saw McHale.

Huh?! Nowhere near?! Are you serious?!

I love nique, he is one of my all-time favorite "non Lakers". it's one of my favorite debates ... and wilkins on the end of a Lakers break would of been amazing. But Worthy was the better mid range shooter, better post player, better passer and better defender. Nique was a better, scorer and rebounder.
In a vacum you take Nique but much like Mchale ...Worthy was the perfect #2 and #3 option for those title teams. No way they are as good with Nique. He was shot happy (kinda like Kobe) and no way he would of been comfortable "eating" after Kareem and Magic. Not sure Worthy could of carried those Hawks teams the same way either. Yes Worthy would of scored more as the #1 option ...but not the way Nique could, who was just gifted athletic scorer whose jumper got better over the years. But Worthy's fundamentals beats Nique's ...though watching Worthy dribble in the open court (he alwys dribbled too high for my tastes) was comedy ...

[lefty]

Manu is better at slashing, creating for others and defending than Ray


Come on now :lmao

[cheguevara]

pretty much even here. I'd pick Manu cause he's white.

not because I'm racist. every team needs a token white boy. might as well be one that can play.

[Jeff Leppard]

It's pretty close. Allen is better off screens, has a quicker release and is more accurate, but Manu is a good enough shooter to keep his defender honest and is more dangerous off the dribble when his defender closes out. Manu is a better passer and defender, as already mentioned, but he makes more errors because he is more involved in the offense than Allen.
If you combined the skills of Ray Ray and Gino, you might have a legit challenger to the GOAT.

[stretch]

Ray has a more accomplished looking career, but I would take Manu all day long.

Manu is much more capable of putting a team on his back offensively.

[Phenomanul]

This debate is close...

but Manu is by far the more interesting baller (despite never been asked to star in a Hollywood film)... you never know what you're gonna get... other than lots of winning.

Manu goes 0 for 10 in a game... but then dives off of the court and zips a perfect pass to his teammate, as the game clock is winding down (saving the possession). Spurs win on a buzzer beater.

Manu scores a GW layup under the defender's arm and then draws an offensive foul on the last play of the game. Spurs win on the road.

Manu scores 24 consecutive points on the road. Spurs win in a blowout.

Manu swats a bat out of the air on Halloween night (because it kept interrupting the game)... Spurs win with his aura... he then is given several rabies shots... the legend of Batman(u) grows...

and many, many, manu more...

[dirk4mvp]

look out daf

[TE]

Manu Ginobili, is who I'd take.


Live and die by Manu

[TE]

And fuck all you Ray Allen nuthuggers.

tee, hee.

[picc84]

pretty much even here. I'd pick Manu cause he's white.

not because I'm racist. every team needs a token white boy. might as well be one that can play.

Far as America's concerned that boy is pure spic.

[lefty]

Far as America's concerned that boy is pure spic.
I googled "allen manu" and some Picc dude posted his opinion in the same thread on RealGM

I guess it was you :D

[LnGrrrR]

I'll take Rayray because I love the daggers, and I'm a homer.

[cantthinkofanything]

I'll take Rayray because I love the daggers, and I'm a homo.

fify

[LnGrrrR]

fify

Witty.

[xellos88330]

I am going to go with Manu on this one.

Defense- Manu
Passing- Manu
Rebounding- Manu
Assists- Manu
Scoring- Ray
FG%- probably Ray
Steals- Manu
FT%- Ray
Blocks- Manu
Awareness- Manu

I would consider durability, but we are considering performers at their peak. At their peak, I would rather have Manu because of the many different dimensions he can bring.

[Magua]

I am going to go with Manu on this one.

Defense- Manu
Passing- Manu
Rebounding- Manu
Assists- Manu
Scoring- Ray
FG%- probably Ray
Steals- Manu
FT%- Ray
Blocks- Manu
Awareness- Manu

I would consider durability, but we are considering performers at their peak. At their peak, I would rather have Manu because of the many different dimensions he can bring.

You are stupid.

[Ghjkll]

It´s close, and even though I´m from Argentina, I think that Ray was a bit better. However, Manu also plays with our NT almost every year, and a lot of playoffs games with the Spurs (between 2003 and 2008). Those extra games add a lot of wear and tear to the body. Last season, Manu rested and then produced a very good season considering he was 33 years old. In fact, as he relied more to his 3pt shot, he played in 80 regular season games (career high). I think that neither can lead a team to a championship as the first option, and they are better suited to be 2nd to a dominant big, at least in the NBA.

[JamStone]

Both in their primes, Ray Allen was probably the better player.

But personally, I'd rather have Manu on my team between the two. Ginobili brings all the intangibles you'd want from a star player without needing to be one. And in his prime, especially with the game on the line in crunchtime, he was at or near the level of most of the other star wing players in the league. Probably a notch below guys like Kobe and Wade. But he was in the neighborhood. He could be that "superstar" player in the final 4 minutes of a close game.

[xellos88330]

You are stupid.

lol, grey name.

[Muser]

Ray Allen. Purely because it would be awesome to have the leading 3 point scorer in NBA history on a Gregg Popovich team.

[mingus]

I think it's one of those debates where you say it depends on the team around them. Manu is first and foremost a playmaker, Ray Allen a pure shooter. Both have always been 2nd fiddle guys, even when they've had to be first fiddle (which is the case with Manu now and was with Ray Allen until he got to Boston). I think they're the same calibre of player. Depends on the team's needs.

[FkLA]

The durability argument that is always used against Manu is retarded tbh, niggas always act like hes made of glass or something. Manu has played 9 seasons in the NBA, he's played 70+ games six of those seasons. He has two others were he played 69 and 65. He's missed 8 games combined the past two seasons while being the Spurs best player, with a few of them being because Pop decided to rest his starters towards the end of the season. Parker has always been similar in that hes a type of player that always misses 10 (give or take a few) games a season yet he never gets this glass label. His minutes were low but thats expected considering he was coming off the bench...guys like Barry, Finley, and Hedo depending on Duncan/Parker to get them open looks was much more of a reason for Manu being a 6th man than him being made out of glass.

Id take peak Manu over peak Ray without hesitation. Ray was pretty much strictly always a shooter/scorer and not much of a playmaker, I dont think his supporting cast is the only reason his Sonics and Bucks never made much noise. Guys like him, Reggie, Redd, Rip, etc dont really make their teammates better...if anything they depend on their teammates' screens to get them open looks. Manu can come at you in different ways, and can wreck more havoc on a defense. Nigga was the best passing two guard in the league and one of the best slashers, and had the ability to close out games as good as anyone. He was also a better defender and had much faster hands than Ray. During 05 and 06 it was pretty much unanimous that Manu was the the 3rd best SG in the league, just a step below Kobe & Wade.

[endrity]

As much as I hate to agree with DAF, I take Manu on this one.

And the reason is pretty much the same as for taking Dirk over KG. Manu actually takes over games, series in a way that Ray never did. For me, when asked to be a number 1 option for the Spurs Manu has always been a better option than Ray ever was.

As good as Ray was, he never hit a peak like Manu did in 05. There was a period in his career when you could argue that he was the second best SG in the league behind Kobe. Wade's rise and Manu's eventual physical decline made that a brief period, but advanced stats still put him 3rd in the league behind those two for a couple of years. Ray never was quite there.

[FkLA]

And the reason is pretty much the same as for taking Dirk over KG. Manu actually takes over games, series in a way that Ray never did. For me, when asked to be a number 1 option for the Spurs Manu has always been a better option than Ray ever was.

Yeah, this comparison is really really similar to the Dirk/KG one. The only small difference is that Ray isnt the best defensive SG of all-time while KG is probably the best defensive PF of all-time.

[endrity]

Yeah, this comparison is really really similar to the Dirk/KG one. The only small difference is that Ray isnt the best defensive SG of all-time while KG is probably the best defensive PF of all-time.

Your hatred of Dirk is well documented, no need to bring it up in another thread.

If you had read my post completely you'd understand the point I was trying to make. Manu wins the argument, because just like Dirk, he has a higher ceiling when there is a need to win games and series. Ray, and KG, didn't.

[Giuseppe]

Been such a long, sustained drop for Manu, it's difficult to recollect his prime. He's disgraced himself so badly the last two years, it's really quite sad. If I hadn't already assigned shit bag status to Duncan, Manu woulda been fully entitled.

[Ginobilly]

Far as America's concerned that boy is pure spic.

Manu is 3/4 Wop, 1/4 Spic according to him on his website.

[TDMVPDPOY]

peak stats and peak play is totally diff..

u can have peak stats and ur production has no meaning affect on a game...

where as a player who doesnt need big numbers on the stat sheet, but u can see his clearly affecting the game

[jacobdrj]

Ray has the most picture perfect shot on the planet... He is the guy I would point to if I wanted to teach someone how to shoot properly...

With that said, Manu was a great overall penetration/shooting threat, and plays with a reckless abandon that few else can match. I think Ray is a better 'real' defender, but the refs called Manu's flops, and that counts for something.

I'd take Manu, knowing what I know now, were I to get either of them from the start of their careers...

[Spur_Fanatic]

Greatly depends on the coach/team/players I have...
But 5.5-out-of-10 times (I'd say 6, but 6 is too excesssive)... I'd take Ray.

Now, if I have a team like the Heat, and I have to choose between Manu of Ray... I'd pick Manu. Manu is the guy that would have no problem standing up to Lebron and Wade and say something "You both are terrible chockers, give me the damn ball, I'll do the assists for the rest of the night..." Ray would just go with the flow.

Still, I'd like to see how Manu declines in the nex years 2 or 3 years.
I may end up going homer and pick him (if there is good reason).

[ducks]

Manu is better at slashing, creating for others and defending than Ray


Come on now :lmao

and not being able to play 40 minutes and not staying healthy

[picc84]

How many minutes does manu play when Duncan or Parker is out? Whats the longest he's ever gone playing 35+?

[FkLA]

Your hatred of Dirk is well documented, no need to bring it up in another thread.

If you had read my post completely you'd understand the point I was trying to make. Manu wins the argument, because just like Dirk, he has a higher ceiling when there is a need to win games and series. Ray, and KG, didn't.

Youre the one that brought the KG/Dirk comparison in here tbh. You couldve easily said Manu had a higher ceiling without including Dirk...especially when the comparisons arent very similar considering the fact that Ray Allen cant take over games defensively like KG, which makes Ray's ceiling considerably lower than KG's.

[Proxy]

Well if it's at their peak, then it really isn't obvious either way. Durability isn't in question. We're arguing for a player that never succeed as a 1 option against a player who spent his prime and was successful as a 2 option. Ray has the best shot of all time so that's hard to go up against, but Manu has the gold against the US to prove his worth as a 1 option.

I go with Manu on this. He is better at creating for his teammates, while Ray's game depends on screens from his teammates. Manu gives you the wild card energy and intangibles and both are clutch. Manu has made stupid ass mistakes, but Ray never really did shit with the Sonics. Best they did was lose to the Spurs in the 2nd round.

[joshdaboss]

For me, I'm super surprised ANY spurs fan would say Allen over Manu. Not because of being a homer, but because they really, truly know how valuable Manu is to a team, and how much he plays above sometimes seemingly pedestrian stats. Manu can effect the game in SO many more ways than Ray Allen. Ray Allen possesses ONE elite skill. That's how he's made it in his career. Manu has no truly elite skill, but he's great in several aspects. I'll always take this type of player over someone who is one-dimensional. Also, defense can't be accurately put into statistics, but an eye test will tell you Manu DESTROYS Ray Allen defensively. I think that's where the difference is really made. Manu's defense is a lot better than Ray's and he's comparable offensively. In fact, I'd call it a wash, because Allen can't do anything besides shoot it. He's not getting others involved.

[DAF86]

Allen the best shot of all time? Nash's shot is clearly better imo.

[Dr House]

Dirk. Gasol is a pussy and a softee. Ok I didn't say this a month ago but since I'm trying to defend Kobe I have to......

Wait what? I thought I heard somebody disparage the Great Lord Bryant so I had to rush over and defend him like always. Nevermind, it's a debate between two scrubs. I guess I can get off my knees now

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Ray Allen's balls would shrivel up when he was being guarded by Bruce Bowen. Manu is afraid of no man.

If I'm choosing teams I take Manu every time.

[ducks]

manu was never guarded by bowen in a game
bowen would own him
kobe think bruce bowen was the best d guy on him
kobe>manu

[FkLA]

parker being owned by conley :lol

[Monostradamus]

Allen the best shot of all time? Nash's shot is clearly better imo.

If you're talking a game of horse, then maybe Nash.

Ray Allen's shot is better because it's quicker, his actual shooting motion is more efficient, and he can get it off against anyone at any time in an NBA game.