Is Tony Parker too CoM?

[timvp]

There's been a common theme in any recent interview Tony Parker has given, and I'm not sure what to think. Basically, whenever asked about the team, he always brings up how this team isn't going anywhere without Manu Ginobili. Recent Parker paraphrases:

-No matter how well the Spurs are playing now, they're going nowhere without Ginobili.

-Parker will take Ginobili at 50% over any young player on the team.

-Ginobili is the key between winning and losing playoff games.

-When asked what happened last season, he says Ginobili's injury at the end of the regular season gave the Spurs no hope.

On one hand, it's great that a star guard has so much love for another star guard. Normally, if you go by the rest of NBA history, two equally successful star guards would have trouble coexisting over the course of a decade. But Parker's love for Ginobili is more palpable than maybe any other teammate tandem ever. He makes ElNono seem like ducks, tbh.

But on the other hand, is it healthy for Parker to love Ginobili so much? With Ginobili's health such a question mark, isn't it even more dangerous that Parker puts so much stock in Ginobili presence? Looking back at the Memphis series, I'm starting to think that not only did the Spurs lose Ginobili to that broken elbow, Parker probably got depressed -- and thus his poor showing early in the series.

While Parker's statements about Ginobili are all probably true, wouldn't it be better if he believed the team revolved more around himself in case Ginobili doesn't stay 100% for the duration of a playoff run?






P.S.

Not to mention the odd dynamic created due to most of CoM hating Parker even though Parker is the Pope of CoM.

[Magua]

But on the other hand, is it healthy for Parker to love Ginobili so much?

Just be grateful it's not RJ with those quotes

[jestersmash]

I've noticed this as well. It's hard to tell if Parker's being sincere or not.

Everyone remembers Tony's faux pas when he claimed that the Spurs' title chances were over (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2011/05/tony-parker-believes-the-window-has-closed-for-spurs/1#.T1MLOcwlI_I), but he backed off on those comments and has since regurgitated the usual "We're headed in the right direction!"

I think Tony's mostly praising Manu out of respect. There's no question that they've always had a great rapport on and off the court.

It'd be difficult for Tony to say something like "Well, I think we're still a very solid regular season team even without Manu as our record indicates, and we'd have an extremely tough time contending for a championship against the likes of Miami, Chicago, and OKC with or without Manu" even though that's probably what he actually thinks.

I suppose it just sounds nicer to say "We're going nowhere without Manu." I never read into these comments too much.

For example, during the practice videos today (well, technically yesterday) reporters asked Bonner how Manu looked during 5 on 5 practice, and Bonner said "Yeah I think he looks great," but when they asked him if he'd be surprised if he didn't see Manu play on Sunday, Bonner backed off of his initial enthusiasm slightly and said "Oh well I don't know about that," as if to say "Well he might play but he might not play, it's a coaching decision and it depends on if he's read to come back."

You'd think if he was truly sincere with his initial take on Manu he'd follow up with "Yeah I'd be surprised if he didn't play, after all he looked great in practice today."

Instead, it seemed like his first response was sort of a "canned" response and his second response was probably more sincere/realistic ("I don't really know if Manu's actually ready to play yet, I won't comment on if I'd be surprised to see him Sunday or not")

[jjktkk]

Parker is just being a realist imo, knowing that without a healthy Ginobili, the Spur's chances in the playoffs are slim and none.

[celldweller]

http://simplelifestrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/thinking-please-be-patient-thecuriousbrain.com_.jpg

[baseline bum]

While Parker's statements about Ginobili are all probably true, wouldn't it be better if he believed the team revolved more around himself in case Ginobili doesn't stay 100% for the duration of a playoff run?


The fact that the Spurs got rolled in 5 in 2009 despite Parker posting maybe 2 of the top 10-15 Spurs playoff performances of all time in that series had to be weighing heavily on him. After that I don't see how he could reasonably think the Spurs could do much without Manu.



P.S.

Not to mention the odd dynamic created due to most of CoM hating Parker even though Parker is the Pope of CoM.

:rollin

[Sense]

WTF is CoM?

[DMC]

Church of Manu


Parker is just being honest. Pop would say the same thing if he could do so without getting lambasted.

[MmP]

I think Parker knows the team so well that despite knowing that Spurs are in best form as the ever been, not having Manu in playoffs = no title. And probably he knows this since last year, maybe he really did notice that team is lost without the spirit of the team. Im just guessing but my point is that a player and a PG mostly, knows really well how a team works and reacts to certain circumstances. And Probably Parker is speaking out of his heart.

[FkLA]

Parker is no Westbrook or Kobe tbh. He knows who the best player on the team is, and he knows that without that best player on the team the Spurs are going nowhere. I dont really like Parker but one thing I kinda like is that hes straightforward and honest. Hes just calling it like it is no surprise there really, jusr letting everybody know who the best player on the team is. Parker can be a very good Robin and Im glad hes embracing that and letting everyone know that the best player on the team has his role as Batman secured once he returns. Props to Tony. :tu

[TJastal]

Parker is no Westbrook or Kobe tbh. He knows who the best player on the team is, and he knows that without that best player on the team the Spurs are going nowhere. I dont really like Parker but one thing I kinda like is that hes straightforward and honest. Hes just calling it like it is no surprise there really, jusr letting everybody know who the best player on the team is. Parker can be a very good Robin and Im glad hes embracing that and letting everyone know that the best player on the team has his role as Batman secured once he returns. Props to Tony. :tu

+1

I think you're correct in saying TP is trying to be sincere, and he really wants to be sincere, but I also think deep down he wants to be also thought of in an equal light, and probably resents the fact that Manu has gotten perhaps more accolades than him and has been more steady in the clutch for most of his career.

But I also think Tony's taken another step this year and is currently undervaluing his own contributions. With Manu being out so long he's basically taken the defacto position of team leadership on. And If he continues to put up 20/10 type games without hardly breaking a sweat he will not only be taking over the reigns of team leadership but the team will also be expecting him to help close out games as well, which has always been Manu's "thing". And with Manu's health declining and age setting in this is the perfect time to start stepping into that role.

[benefactor]

WTF is CoM?

Sense earned this Spur by being an original member of SpursTalk.com
Really?

[Hoops Czar]

Its a system of checks and balances and the big three know it. When one of them goes down, it drastically reduces their chances of a deep playoff run. Parker and Ginobili have played together for seven years so it wouldn't surprise me if the two formed a bond.

[romain.star]

But on the other hand, is it healthy for Parker to love Ginobili so much? With Ginobili's health such a question mark, isn't it even more dangerous that Parker puts so much stock in Ginobili presence? Looking back at the Memphis series, I'm starting to think that not only did the Spurs lose Ginobili to that broken elbow, Parker probably got depressed -- and thus his poor showing early in the series.

[/SIZE]

C'mon... we get your point about Parker appreciating Manu but this can"t be an excuse for his poor outings early in the Memphis series

[Pauleta14]

Parker was just saying what he thinks he is supposed to say, nothing more...

He knows that Manu is like a god for Spurs fans, so even if he thought they could win without Manu, he wouldn't make that mistake.

He probably thinks the truth, whitch is that without ANY of the big3, the Spurs are going nowhere, not only without Manu...

[Cane]

Good thing Manu's wife isn't much of a looker so the pope of CoM won't run into any drama there. :downspin:

:flag:

[spursfan09]

Tony just acknowledging we can't do crap without our star shooting guard. Just like manu n the spurs can't do crap without our star pg

[spursfan09]

What if tony was out all the time ? Manu would probably say same thing. Even if he didn't believe it he wouldn't throw tony under the bus like that

[jag]

I think Parker is just being respectful of an older player that he realizes has lost a step or two. Tony knows he's by far the best player on this team, so there's no reason to rub it in Manu's face.

[ElNono]

They're both good friends. Just like ducks and me, tbh

[ElNono]

Frankly, Manu probably would say the same thing about Tony. He actually has lauded Tony's play and leadership this season.

Manu the pope of CoP?

[will_spurs]

I love how the CoM is jumping all over this by equating "we're going nowhere in the playoffs without Manu" and "Manu is the best player on the team".

The thing is, Parker is the best player on the team right now, and by a clear margin too. However he also knows that there's a lot of deadweight on the team come playoff time (RJ, Blair, Bonner...) and that Manu being injured = an empty spot on the roster.

Any member of the Big 3 would be saying the same as Parker if anyone of them was injured, because they know all 3 of them have to do the heavy lifting, other players are just roleplayers.

And finally if there's one thing one can say about Parker is that he's not afraid to speak his mind, and he actually tends to be brutally honest. I don't see why he'd go PC or sugar-coating it this time. This is really just another way of saying that the Spurs aren't going to be contenders any more, because Manu isn't going to be healthy ever again.

[Cane]

Frankly, Manu probably would say the same thing about Tony. He actually has lauded Tony's play and leadership this season.

Manu the pope of CoP?

Manu doesn't believe in churches :hat

[ElNono]

Manu doesn't believe in churches :hat

But, but, but he must believe in something! :dramaquee

[jermaine]

There's been a common theme in any recent interview Tony Parker has given, and I'm not sure what to think. Basically, whenever asked about the team, he always brings up how this team isn't going anywhere without Manu Ginobili. Recent Parker paraphrases:

-No matter how well the Spurs are playing now, they're going nowhere without Ginobili.

-Parker will take Ginobili at 50% over any young player on the team.

-Ginobili is the key between winning and losing playoff games.

-When asked what happened last season, he says Ginobili's injury at the end of the regular season gave the Spurs no hope.

On one hand, it's great that a star guard has so much love for another star guard. Normally, if you go by the rest of NBA history, two equally successful star guards would have trouble coexisting over the course of a decade. But Parker's love for Ginobili is more palpable than maybe any other teammate tandem ever. He makes ElNono seem like ducks, tbh.

But on the other hand, is it healthy for Parker to love Ginobili so much? With Ginobili's health such a question mark, isn't it even more dangerous that Parker puts so much stock in Ginobili presence? Looking back at the Memphis series, I'm starting to think that not only did the Spurs lose Ginobili to that broken elbow, Parker probably got depressed -- and thus his poor showing early in the series.

While Parker's statements about Ginobili are all probably true, wouldn't it be better if he believed the team revolved more around himself in case Ginobili doesn't stay 100% for the duration of a playoff run?






P.S.

Not to mention the odd dynamic created due to most of CoM hating Parker even though Parker is the Pope of CoM.

Mr. Timvp you got alotta respect around here but your comments on Tony don't be on point. Didn't he make you eat some serious crow already. Lmmfao along with alotta us.

[~Sweetmelody~]

I think we are looking a little too much into this, even though it’s a fun topic to discuss. I honestly prefer for Tony to show love/respect for his fellow teammate than nothing at all. Is he sincere? Who knows, but I like to think everyone gets along -especially Tony and Manu and more because of all those Tony vs Manu threads I have read over the years. It’s like “ha the joke is on us!” they love each other, lol



While Parker's statements about Ginobili are all probably true, wouldn't it be better if he believed the team revolved more around himself in case Ginobili doesn't stay 100% for the duration of a playoff run?

I think he does. Didn't he say in a recent interview that Pop wanted him to make it his team, to be more of a leader?

[cherylsteele]

Church of Manu


Parker is just being honest. Pop would say the same thing if he could do so without getting lambasted.
For some reason I thought CoM was meaning Coach of the Month, which was making no sense at all.

[TMTTRIO]

So who's it going to be next after Manu retires pretty soon? Tony vs. ???????

[Kori Ellis]

LOL timvp told me people would take this thread too seriously. But when he told me the title, I thought he said, "calm" not "CoM."

[Sense]

Really?

Yes about 4 years before you...

Go ahead, do another gray comment..

[Libri]

I thought CoM meant communist. lol

[DMC]

And I think they should all be fans of each other, even RJ. That's their job. That's how they do so well given so little to work with.

However, we can still shit all over RJ at will.

[vander]

:lol people think manu is the best player on the team

if TP had been injured instead of manu, Spurs would be about .500 right now.

[timvp]

I've noticed this as well. It's hard to tell if Parker's being sincere or not. It's 100% sincere. I disagree with any suggestion that it's just Parker appeasing Spurs fans or whatever. It's actually what Parker truly believes.

For example, here an actual quote from over All-Star weekend:

Person X: "Congrats on being an All-Star and leading the Spurs to a great record so far."

Parker: "Thanks but we're not going anywhere without Manu healthy."

And that wasn't in front of a camera, tbh.


The fact that the Spurs got rolled in 5 in 2009 despite Parker posting maybe 2 of the top 10-15 Spurs playoff performances of all time in that series had to be weighing heavily on him. After that I don't see how he could reasonably think the Spurs could do much without Manu.

Good point :tu


Im just guessing but my point is that a player and a PG mostly, knows really well how a team works and reacts to certain circumstances.

Sounds reasonable.

[timvp]

C'mon... we get your point about Parker appreciating Manu but this can"t be an excuse for his poor outings early in the Memphis seriesIt's better than any other excuse I can think of, tbh. Either Parker choked, wasn't ready for the playoffs, didn't really care, got exposed by Mike Conley or he got depressed after Manu broke his elbow.

Out of those possibilities, I'd hope it was the last one.


What if tony was out all the time ? Manu would probably say same thing. Even if he didn't believe it he wouldn't throw tony under the bus like thatManu shows his respect, don't get me wrong, but during that stretch in 2010 when Manu was playing like the best player in the NBA, I don't remember Manu being dismissive about the success and saying the Spurs wouldn't do anything without Parker.

[Sense]

As much as I love Manu, there's no way he's the best player in the team right now... I think Tony Parker wants to believe that the Spurs are a MUCH better team with him in there.. he might not like the pressure, but I still believe Tony is the best player this team has.

[spurs10]

I think Tony is just telling it like it is. Manu's injuries don't seem to have hurt his playing so far this season, though I think Manu's arm in the playoffs certainly made him lose hope.

[timvp]

Parker is no Westbrook or Kobe tbh. He knows who the best player on the team is, and he knows that without that best player on the team the Spurs are going nowhere. I dont really like Parker but one thing I kinda like is that hes straightforward and honest. Hes just calling it like it is no surprise there really, jusr letting everybody know who the best player on the team is. Parker can be a very good Robin and Im glad hes embracing that and letting everyone know that the best player on the team has his role as Batman secured once he returns. Props to Tony. :tu

Classic CoM post. I couldn't even come up with a better one if I tried :lmao

It's classic that:

1) Everything has to be turned into a competition in which Manu > Parker when it doesn't matter since they're on the same team.

2) CoM conveniently forgets that Tim Duncan is on the team and has been the "Batman" 99% of the time.

3) Instead of agreeing with Parker's respect, CoM turns it around and uses it against Parker.




Any non-CoM or CoP member can clearly see that Ginobili and Parker have been pretty damn equal throughout their careers in terms of being the second banana.

[roycrikside]

I respect you L.J. and I respect your work, but with all due respect this is the dumbest thread you've ever started since 2009, the infamous "How the Spurs can win a title without Manu" rubbish.

Frankly, you're just trolling.

Point guards are supposed to be extensions of the head coach on the floor and Parker is just echoing what Pop has always said. They can't win shit without any of the big three being down. Hell, they probably can't even with all three healthy, but at least there's a tiny chance.

If Tony has a shortcoming with the press is that sometimes he's too honest. Still no reason to start a whole thread about it. Who cares if he should say it or not? It's the truth. If Manu never said the same thing when Tony was out it doesn't mean he didn't think it, it just means he's more stoic and polished with the media.

Besides, you've missed the point entirely. No one in CoM has ever questioned Tony and Manu's relationship off the floor. Everyone knows they're tight, especially now after all their other close friends have moved on and all the big three have left is each other. They've questioned the chemistry on the floor, just like Westbrook/Durant. The times people have ripped Tony for not passing enough, it's not like it made him a bad person, just a guy with a low basketball I.Q. :-)

[DPG21920]

I wish TP would go Kobe and use his candid nature to put pressure on the FO to make a move. I think TP is just parroting Pop though who says similar stuff which I agree is a mental crutch.

[roycrikside]

This thread is like a Ducks post but with better spelling and grammar. Lame.

[DMC]

:lol people think manu is the best player on the team

if TP had been injured instead of manu, Spurs would be about .500 right now.
Another Manu vs TP thread?

Isn't it like asking which leg you really need, the left or right? The right may be stronger, but you really don't want to have to pick.

[benefactor]

Yes about 4 years before you...

Go ahead, do another gray comment..
Your counting is obviously much better than your powers of perception.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

That 2009 Spurs team without Manu was probably the worst spurs team of the past 15 years. Parker doesn't need to be so down about that since the team has so much more depth now. Hes having an incredible year.

[DAF86]

I heard somewhere that Manu said before the season that this is Parker's teams, tbh.

[Sense]

Your counting is obviously much better than your powers of perception.

The fact that I didn't recognize an acronym, especially when it's used for something as stupid as "the church" of a player, has nothing to do with my seniority in this board.

[DAF86]

:lol people think manu is the best player on the team

if TP had been injured instead of manu, Spurs would be about .500 right now.

Nah, team would probably have around the same record they have right now and Manu would be the one stepping up in Tony's absence.

This has happen many times before. Whenever a memeber of the big three goes down, the other two step up (lately Manu and Tony more than Tim) and the team remains competitive.

[benefactor]

The fact that I didn't recognize an acronym, especially when it's used for something as stupid as "the church" of a player, has nothing to do with my seniority in this board.
It's only been in every "church of" thread that has been made since...well...as long as I've been here. But whatever. I'm just bored and giving you shit just to do it. Carry on.

[TJastal]

Nah, team would probably have around the same record they have right now and Manu would be the one stepping up in Tony's absence.

This has happen many times before. Whenever a memeber of the big three goes down, the other two step up (lately Manu and Tony more than Tim) and the team remains competitive.

That is very doubtful, IMO. With Ford also down the spurs would have struggled getting consistent point guard play. No way they come out of that rodeo 8-1.

Spurs are also just deeper at the 2/3 than the 1 and it obviously has showed.

[ElNono]

Manu is and always has been the heart and miracle worker, whereas Tony has been the motor and Tim the steady talent. That's why they complement eachother so well.

Some CoP members will take this as some sort of slight for some reason, but it isn't.

[timvp]

Any non-CoM or CoP member can clearly see that Ginobili and Parker have been pretty damn equal throughout their careers in terms of being the second banana.

That gives me an idea: Let's break it down by playoff series and see who has been the second banana more often.

2003
Suns
Parker
13.5 Points
39.8% FG%
2.5 Assists
2.0 Rebounds
2.7 Turnovers

Ginobili
7.7 Points
28.0% FG%
3.8 Assists
3.8 Rebounds
1.2 Turnovers

Lakers
Parker
14.8 Points
40.5% FG%
3.5 Assists
2.8 Rebounds
1.2 Turnovers

Ginobili
11.7 Points
51.2% FG%
2.5 Assists
3.3 Rebounds
1.5 Turnovers

Mavs
Parker
16.3 Points
42.2% FG%
4.0 Assists
3.0 Rebounds
2.2 Turnovers

Ginobili
9.7 Points
42.6% FG%
3.3 Assists
3.7 Rebounds
1.7 Turnovers

Nets
Parker
14.0 Points
38.6% FG%
4.2 Assists
3.2 Rebounds
1.8 Turnovers

Ginobili
8.7 Points
34.8% FG%
2.0 Assists
4.5 Rebounds
1.7 Turnovers

2003 Recap: Let's call the Suns and Lakers series even despite Parker having a decent case of being better in both. The Mavs and Nets series clearly Parker ahead. So far it's Parker 4, Ginobili 2.

2004
Grizzlies
Parker
21.0 Points
52.7% FG%
8.5 Assists
2.0 Rebounds
3.3 Turnovers

Ginobili
10.5 Points
36.7% FG%
2.3 Assists
4.0 Rebounds
2.5 Turnovers

Lakers
Parker
16.7 Points
38.1% FG%
6.0 Assists
2.2 Rebounds
3.0 Turnovers

Ginobili
14.7 Points
48.4% FG%
3.7 Assists
6.2 Rebounds
1.8 Turnovers

2004 Recap: Parker destroyed the Grizzlies. We'll give Ginobili the advantage against the Lakers. Now it's Parker 5, Ginobili 3.

2005
Nuggets
Parker
18.2 Points
43.9% FG%
5.8 Assists
2.8 Rebounds
3.0 Turnovers

Ginobili
22.8 Points
47.7% FG%
4.0 Assists
6.0 Rebounds
2.4 Turnovers

Sonics
Parker
17.7 Points
45.6% FG%
4.3 Assists
3.3 Rebounds
2.3 Turnovers

Ginobili
20.5 Points
57.6% FG%
4.2 Assists
5.2 Rebounds
3.3 Turnovers

Suns
Parker
20.4 Points
45.9% FG%
4.2 Assists
3.0 Rebounds
4.0 Turnovers

Ginobili
22.2 Points
49.4% FG%
4.8 Assists
6.2 Rebounds
2.2 Turnovers

Pistons
Parker
13.9 Points
45.8% FG%
3.4 Assists
2.4 Rebounds
3.1 Turnovers

Ginobili
18.7 Points
49.4% FG%
4.0 Assists
5.9 Rebounds
3.3 Turnovers

2005 Recap: Ginobili was outstanding in what turned out to be his peak. He gets each series, although Parker played well in each round. Now it's Parker 5, Ginobili 7.

2006
Kings
Parker
22.2 Points
51.0% FG%
4.7 Assists
3.5 Rebounds
3.0 Turnovers

Ginobili
15.0 Points
47.8% FG%
4.3 Assists
4.8 Rebounds
2.7 Turnovers

Mavs
Parker
20.1 Points
42.2% FG%
3.1 Assists
3.7 Rebounds
3.1 Turnovers

Ginobili
21.3 Points
48.9% FG%
1.9 Assists
4.3 Rebounds
2.4 Turnovers

2006 Recap: Parker vs. Kings, Ginobili vs. Mavs. Now it's Parker 6, Ginobili 8.

2007
Nuggets
Parker
18.2 Points
44.2% FG%
6.8 Assists
3.2 Rebounds
3.0 Turnovers

Ginobili
13.4 Points
33.9% FG%
3.8 Assists
5.0 Rebounds
2.2 Turnovers

Suns
Parker
20.8 Points
45.1% FG%
5.7 Assists
2.8 Rebounds
3.5 Turnovers

Ginobili
17.8 Points
41.0% FG%
4.3 Assists
6.8 Rebounds
1.8 Turnovers

Jazz
Parker
20.2 Points
48.1% FG%
6.8 Assists
2.8 Rebounds
3.6 Turnovers

Ginobili
17.6 Points
48.2% FG%
3.8 Assists
4.0 Rebounds
2.2 Turnovers

Cavs
Parker
24.5 Points
56.8% FG%
3.3 Assists
5.0 Rebounds
3.0 Turnovers

Ginobili
17.8 Points
36.7% FG%
2.5 Assists
5.8 Rebounds
2.3 Turnovers

2007 Recap: Parker takes Nuggets, Suns and Cavs. We'll call the Jazz a tie. Update is Parker 10, Ginobili 9.

2008
Suns
Tony Parker
29.6 Points
52.3% FG%
7.0 Assists
3.4 Rebounds
3.2 Turnovers

Manu Ginobili
18.2 Points
45.1% FG%
2.0 Assists
3.8 Rebounds
3.2 Turnovers

Hornets
Parker
19.4 Points
48.6% FG%
5.7 Assists
3.7 Rebounds
3.1 Turnovers

Ginobili
21.3 Points
43.5% FG%
6.0 Assists
4.1 Rebounds
2.7 Turnovers

Lakers
Parker
19.4 Points
47.7% FG%
5.6 Assists
4.0 Rebounds
2.4 Turnovers

Ginobili
12.6 Points
35.8% FG%
3.0 Assists
3.2 Rebounds
2.4 Turnovers

2008 Recap: Parker gets Suns and Lakers. Ginobili gets Hornets. Now it's Parker 12, Ginobili 10.

2009
Mavs
Parker
28.6 Points
54.6% FG%
6.8 Assists
4.2 Rebounds
4.2 Turnovers

Ginobili
Injured
2009 Recap: Parker was really good. Ginobili was recovering from his Olympic injury. Parker 13, Ginobili 10.

2010
Mavs
Parker
15.8 Points
47.0% FG%
5.7 Assists
3.7 Rebounds
1.8 Turnovers

Ginobili
19.0 Points
41.7% FG%
5.0 Assists
3.7 Rebounds
2.7 Turnovers

Suns
Parker
19.5 Points
47.9% FG%
5.0 Assists
4.0 Rebounds
2.8 Turnovers

Ginobili
20.0 Points
41.1% FG%
7.5 Assists
3.8 Rebounds
3.5 Turnovers

2010 Recap: Pretty darn close but let's give both to Ginobili. That makes it Parker 13, Ginobili 12.

2011
Grizzlies
Parker
19.7 Points
46.2% FG%
5.2 Assists
2.7 Rebounds
3.3 Turnovers

Ginobili
20.6 Points
44.3% FG%
4.2 Assists
4.0 Rebounds
3.4 Turnovers

2011 Recap: Parker's disappointment against the Grizzlies doesn't look that bad statistically, tbh. Ginobili was better though.



Final score: Parker 13, Ginobili 13

So yeah, if anyone says Parker has been much better than Ginobili or Ginobili has been much better than Parker ... they're biased. They've been even over the years when it matters.

[Barfunk]

Lol 13-13 nice find

[TMTTRIO]

^If you want to get into details about what they've done you forgot Tony also has a lot more All Star appearances, Final MVPs, and personal accomplishments then Manu so I guess that makes him the better of the two? Ok we get it Tony is the best. Besides Manu said it was Tony's team at the beginning of the season.

[DAF86]

That is very doubtful, IMO. With Ford also down the spurs would have struggled getting consistent point guard play. No way they come out of that rodeo 8-1.

Spurs are also just deeper at the 2/3 than the 1 and it obviously has showed.

Ginobili would have taken Parker's role as the primary ballhandler and Neal would have played the role that he has played during TJ Ford absence. Spurs would have been fine.

They always do the same.

in 2008 and 2010 when Parker went down for long periods Manu took over and the Spurs rolled.

In 2009 and now Parker has done the same with the same results.

Manu and Tony are better than what most people realize and the Spurs system helps a lot too.

[ElNono]

You can't give Tony '03 against the Nets with a straight face, tbh...

[DAF86]

Manu is at a disadvantage on that comparisson tbh. Parker was a established second banana in '03 while Ginobili was a rookie.

[timvp]

You can't give Tony '03 against the Nets with a straight face, tbh...

Parker wasn't very good but Ginobili was worse. Much fewer points and assists but same number of turnovers and worse field goal percentage. Don't really see where the argument could be, tbh.

:wakeup

[ElNono]

Also, '08, Tim with the 3 pointer and Manu with the drive close that series... And that's ultimately the lasting impression. Making plays when plays are needed.

[DPG21920]

Timvp pulling a DPG.

[ElNono]

Parker wasn't very good but Ginobili was worse. Much fewer points and assists but same number of turnovers and worse field goal percentage. Don't really see where the argument could be, tbh.

:wakeup

Manu wasn't steady but he had at least 3 key plays that turned that series for the Spurs. A steal on Kittles in the waning moments of the game we won in NJ. A floater over KMart that actually nailed that game. And the famed steal over RJ that turned game 6 around.

As far as Tony, well, Speedy Claxton played great that game 6... :lol

[FkLA]

The best player on the team is just being politically correct obviously, despite what he says everyone knows this is his team. Its been his team for the past two season and was at the beginning of this season before the injury. As far as the 13-13 tie, the best player on the team hadnt even completely established himself in 03' and 04' meanwhile Parker was a starter getting big minutes a couple of games into his rookie season. Everybody knows the best player on the team is much more of a playoff warrior than Parker though, clog the paint and Parker becomes very average. The best player on the team has much more in his offensive arsenal and he goes harder at the defensive end.

[timvp]

Manu is at a disadvantage on that comparisson tbh. Parker was a established second banana in '03 while Ginobili was a rookie.

Eh, can't really buy it. Parker had one year advantage in the NBA but that was only Parker's second season of high level basketball. While Parker was as old as Cory Joseph and Kawhi Leonard (20) and had never seen anything like the pressure of the NBA Finals going up against a Hall of Fame point guard. Ginobili was 25 and had already been through wars in Europe.

In terms of being ready for that situation, they were pretty damn equal.

[ChumpDumper]

Do you remember who was defending Speedy Claxton that game?

It's not the person that ended up defending Parker.

spurfan is psychotic

[FkLA]

The best player on the team doesnt get manhandled by the top players at his position the way Tony does either. When hes rolling the best player on the team goes toe to toe with guys like Kobe and MJ.

[ElNono]

Tony is hands down the best player on the team right now and he should be. Both Tim and Manu have had some degree of decline in their games. Manu specifically has relied more on his steaky shooting, and become more of a playmaker. It's a natural occurence as you age.

The alarming part would be if Tony isn't the best player at this stage.

[ChumpDumper]

The best player on the team doesnt get manhandled by players at his position the way Tony does either. When hes rolling the best player on the team goes toe to toe with guys like Kobe and MJ.:lmao

[ElNono]

Do you remember who was defending Speedy Claxton that game?

It's not the person that ended up defending Parker.

Credit to the guy that defended Tony, I guess...

[FkLA]

^Was either some Kirby Kittles guy or Lucious Malfoy IIRC, both all-world defenders right up there with Michael Conley Jr :rolleyes

[ChumpDumper]

Credit to the guy that defended Tony, I guess...Credit to you for admitting you don't remember, I guess...

[timvp]

Also, '08, Tim with the 3 pointer and Manu with the drive close that series... And that's ultimately the lasting impression. Making plays when plays are needed.

To close that series? That was Game 1.

In Game 3, in the only road win either team had that series, Parker had 41 and 12. I would think that would count for something, tbh.

Or in Game 5, that actually closed the series, Parker had 31 and 8 while Ginobili had 8 and 0.

There are some close series between the two but that isn't one.


Manu wasn't steady but he had at least 3 key plays that turned that series for the Spurs. A steal on Kittles in the waning moments of the game we won in NJ. A floater over KMart that actually nailed that game. And the famed steal over RJ that turned game 6 around.

As far as Tony, well, he outplayed a Hall of Famer in Game 1 and Game 3 so two complete games should be equal to three plays.

Somewhat fixed.

[ElNono]

Credit to you for admitting you don't remember, I guess...

Kidd defended Tony, IIRC... Credit to him for forcing Pop to roll wit Speedy in a crucial comeback...

[ChumpDumper]

Kidd defended Tony, IIRC...Stick to Manu memories.

[ChumpDumper]

Look at what this thread has become.

LJ wins troll of the year so far.

[timvp]

The best player on the team doesnt get manhandled by the top players at his position the way Tony does either.

That's true about Duncan.

But if you talking about Ginobili, his worst series came against the likes of Sasha Vujacic, Michael Finley, whoever the 2004 Grizzlies had and Steve Blake.

Just look at the series numbers. Neither Parker nor Ginobili could claim to be dependable on the level of Duncan.

[DAF86]

Eh, can't really buy it. Parker had one year advantage in the NBA but that was only Parker's second season of high level basketball. While Parker was as old as Cory Joseph and Kawhi Leonard (20) and had never seen anything like the pressure of the NBA Finals going up against a Hall of Fame point guard. Ginobili was 25 and had already been through wars in Europe.

In terms of being ready for that situation, they were pretty damn equal.

'03 season, shots per game:

Tony- 12.7
Manu- 5.8

Yeah, they were in similar situations.

[timvp]

Tony is hands down the best player on the team right now and he should be.

Eh don't really agree. If all three are healthy, Parker isn't clearly the best. If Parker keeps up this level of play, Manu plays like he did last year and Duncan keeps playing like he has in the last month or so, I'd say they are all interchangeable.

[ElNono]

To close that series? That was Game 1.

tbh, I remember watching that game in a hotel room in San Antonio. That was the series with Shaq on the Suns, right?


In Game 3, in the only road win either team had that series, Parker had 41 and 12. I would think that would count for something, tbh.

Or in Game 5, that actually closed the series, Parker had 31 and 8 while Ginobili had 8 and 0.

tbh, nobody remembers that.


There are some close series between the two but that isn't one.

Close as in numbers?


Somewhat fixed.

Thanks

[ChumpDumper]

tbh, nobody remembers that.:rollin

[timvp]

The best player on the team is just being politically correct obviously, despite what he says everyone knows this is his team. Its been his team for the past two season and was at the beginning of this season before the injury. As far as the 13-13 tie, the best player on the team hadnt even completely established himself in 03' and 04' meanwhile Parker was a starter getting big minutes a couple of games into his rookie season. Everybody knows the best player on the team is much more of a playoff warrior than Parker though, clog the paint and Parker becomes very average. The best player on the team has much more in his offensive arsenal and he goes harder at the defensive end.

Good shtick, tbh.

[ElNono]

Stick to Manu memories.

Kidd didn't defend Tony in that series?

[ChumpDumper]

Kidd didn't defend Tony in that series?
tbh, nobody remembers that.:lol

[ElNono]

Right. People do remember Speedy Claxton making plays in game 6...

[timvp]

Kidd didn't defend Tony in that series?

Come on, ElNono. 2003 wasn't that long ago. :depressed

If we are only going by the part of the series that Kidd defended Tony, not only was Parker better than Ginobili, he was better than Kidd.

[ChumpDumper]

No shit, El Nono. Do you only remember Parker in contexts that make Manu look better?

[timvp]

'03 season, shots per game:

Tony- 12.7
Manu- 5.8

Yeah, they were in similar situations.

Minutes per game in the 2003 playoffs:

Tony- 33.9
Manu- 27.5

That's pretty close to the standard split in minutes between the two.

[FkLA]

That's true about Duncan.

But if you talking about Ginobili, his worst series came against the likes of Sasha Vujacic, Michael Finley, whoever the 2004 Grizzlies had and Steve Blake.

Just look at the series numbers. Neither Parker nor Ginobili could claim to be dependable on the level of Duncan.

Prime Duncan is in a league of his own, no question. But as far as getting the silver medal it clearly goes to the current best player on the team especially if we look at the period after father time caught up with Duncan...in the past 3 years the only playoff series win the Spurs have was led by the best player on the team and Parker coming off the bench. The year before when it was clearly Parkers team the Spurs got destroyed by those same ringless faggots in Dallas.

[ElNono]

Eh don't really agree. If all three are healthy, Parker isn't clearly the best. If Parker keeps up this level of play, Manu plays like he did last year and Duncan keeps playing like he has in the last month or so, I'd say they are all interchangeable.

I think Tony is one of the few that can still affect the game more. Tim and Manu can have their peaks, but Tony I think it's the only one that's young and good enough to provide the steady barrage. Obviously, his jumper falling is key to that.

[timvp]

In Game 3, in the only road win either team had that series, Parker had 41 and 12. I would think that would count for something, tbh.

Or in Game 5, that actually closed the series, Parker had 31 and 8 while Ginobili had 8 and 0.

tbh, nobody remembers that.

:lmao

Well, while that may be true, that's why I posted it. For whatever reasons (probably because Manu is the most loved player in franchise history) Manu's highlights are magnified by history, while his lowlights are forgotten. For Parker, it's the opposite.

[DPG21920]

So what's the point here, boiled down sans the subtle goods?

[DAF86]

Minutes per game in the 2003 playoffs:

Tony- 33.9
Manu- 27.5

That's pretty close to the standard split in minutes between the two.

Yeah, but how were those minutes played by each guy? It's not the same to play 30 minutes just standing there and waiting to take wide open jumpers than playing 30 minutes while getting plays called for you.

[ChumpDumper]

So what's the point here, boiled down sans the subtle goods?Tony loves Manu.

Everyone hates Tony.

[ElNono]

Come on, ElNono. 2003 wasn't that long ago. :depressed

If we are only going by the part of the series that Kidd defended Tony, not only was Parker better than Ginobili, he was better than Kidd.


No shit, El Nono. Do you only remember Parker in contexts that make Manu look better?

:lol I just remember Manu with a deer in the headlights look making stuff happen. I also remember the early criticism on Tony for disappearing in big games back then. Shit, I don't even know if the search function goes that far back, but IIRC, even LJ was on that train at some very distant point in time.

Frankly, I only commented on two series that LJ listed. Tony has been pretty awesome in a lot of series too, especially when the matchup has been favorable to him (well deserved Finals MVP against the Cavs come to mind).

tbh, I promise to dust off my championship DVD collection when I get home and take a second look.

[ElNono]

:lmao

Well, while that may be true, that's why I posted it. For whatever reasons (probably because Manu is the most loved player in franchise history) Manu's highlights are magnified by history, while his lowlights are forgotten. For Parker, it's the opposite.

See, we agree. But I'm the CoM's ducks... :rolleyes

:lol

[timvp]

I think Tony is one of the few that can still affect the game more. Tim and Manu can have their peaks, but Tony I think it's the only one that's young and good enough to provide the steady barrage. Obviously, his jumper falling is key to that.

Per-minute, I haven't seen any indication yet that Parker is better than Ginobili. We'll see after Ginobili return but on a per-minute basis, Ginobili has been better than Parker since the beginning of the 2009-10 season at least. Their overall impact has been close to equal mostly because Parker can play more minutes and has been healthier over his career.

But don't shortchange Ginobili, ElNono :nope

[ChumpDumper]

:lol I just remember Manu with a deer in the headlights look making stuff happen. I also remember the early criticism on Tony for disappearing in big games back then. Shit, I don't even know if the search function goes that far back, but IIRC, even LJ was on that train at some very distant point in time.

Frankly, I only commented on two series that LJ listed. Tony has been pretty awesome in a lot of series too, especially when the matchup has been favorable to him (well deserved Finals MVP against the Cavs come to mind).

tbh, I promise to dust off my championship DVD collection when I get home and take a second look.It's not like it's obscure trivia. It's the basis for the whole legend of Speedy Claxton.

spurfan disappoints

again

[DPG21920]

Tony loves Manu.

Everyone hates Tony.

I love TP.

[ChumpDumper]

I love TP.Everyone hates you.

[FkLA]

Tony loves Manu.

Everyone hates Tony.

The best player on the team is a much better human being and plays the game much more unselfishly than Tony. Whats wrong with liking him more than Tony ?

[ChumpDumper]

The best player on the team is a much better human being and plays the game much more unselfishly than Tony. Whats wrong with liking him more than Tony ?spurfan must hate

[ChumpDumper]

lol much better human being

[ElNono]

Per-minute, I haven't seen any indication yet that Parker is better than Ginobili. We'll see after Ginobili return but on a per-minute basis, Ginobili has been better than Parker since the beginning of the 2009-10 season at least. Their overall impact has been close to equal mostly because Parker can play more minutes and has been healthier over his career.

But don't shortchange Ginobili, ElNono :nope

I'm not shortchanging him, and I know that when we need that ballsy play we'll get it from him. I just don't think he can still drive relentlessly for 20mpg... You'll see more shooting and you'll see more passing. He can still contribute a lot.

But from a steady aspect, I think Tony is the guy with both the speed and the stamina to dominate more on a pure scoring aspect.

[ElNono]

It's not like it's obscure trivia. It's the basis for the whole legend of Speedy Claxton.

spurfan disappoints

again

So you disagree Speedy Claxton had a great game 6?

Okay

[ChumpDumper]

So you disagree Speedy Claxton had a great game 6?

OkayI thought you above making straw man arguments.

I was wrong.

spurfan disillusions

[DAF86]

lol much better human being

Manu is in the top three of the greatest human beings of all time alongside Gandhi and George Clooney, everybody knows that. The only thing preventing him from beign the clear cut number one are his poor tipping habits.

[FkLA]

spurfan must hate

spurfan needs its medications was a better retort tbh

[ElNono]

I thought you above making straw man arguments.

I was wrong.

:lol I'm glad you got that cleared up

[jestersmash]

See, we agree. But I'm the CoM's ducks... :rolleyes

:lol

Speaking of ducks, anyone else have a burning desire to uncover ducks' true identity?

I know you're huge Ginobili fan ElNono, but 'ElNono' is also pretty much your main account :lol

ducks is actually trolling (rather effectively I might add) pretty much non-stop. It's a bona fide troll account.

Wouldn't it be cool to have a "gentleman's rule" to relinquish anonymity of all troll accounts 3, 5, 10 years down the road? We could all look back and go "Oh, so that's who <insert troll account> was."

[DPG21920]

Everyone hates you.

:lol

[timvp]

:lol I just remember Manu with a deer in the headlights look making stuff happen. I also remember the early criticism on Tony for disappearing in big games back then. Shit, I don't even know if the search function goes that far back, but IIRC, even LJ was on that train at some very distant point in time.Tbh, I was thrilled with Parker's play against the Nets at the time. A 20-year-old point guard going up against a top five point guard of all-time who has having the best season of his career looked like a curbstomping in the making. But Parker actually outplaying Kidd in the series while the two went head-to-head was astonishing.

To have expected Parker to outplay Kidd and then be able to have success when the Nets put a taller defender on him while trapping him on pick-and-rolls would have been ludicrous. But somehow that's what history expects out of Parker. I've never understood that or the legend of Speedy Claxton.

I did criticize Parker for not finishing well but that was years later, tbh.

[ElNono]

Speaking of ducks, anyone else have a burning desire to uncover ducks' true identity?

I know you're huge Ginobili fan ElNono, but 'ElNono' is also pretty much your main account :lol

ducks is actually trolling (rather effectively I might add) pretty much non-stop. It's a bona fide troll account.

Wouldn't it be cool to have a "gentleman's rule" to relinquish anonymity of all troll accounts 3, 5, 10 years down the road? We could all look back and go "Oh, so that's who <insert troll account> was."

Manu is my favorite player for reasons I stated before, but I was a Spurs fan before Manu and will be after Manu retires.

I have Duncan jerseys, posters, etc. I even have TP and Bonner autographs.

The whole Parker hater schtick is just that.

[rascal]

Never read too much into public statements from players.

Most interviews with players are mostly a waste of time. They just say typical answers which amount to nothing.

[DontStopBelieving]

Manu and Tony both have to play extremely well, along with Timmy, for the Spurs to have any hopes of a ring this year, so there really isn't any use of arguing over this..

All 3 are equally important to this Spurs team, whether it be Tony's scoring and penetration, Manu's energy and playmaking, or Tim's leadership and defense. If you take out any of those 3, the Spurs probably wouldn't even make it out of the first round, and its been that way for years.

[DPG21920]

Tbh, I was thrilled with Parker's play against the Nets at the time. A 20-year-old point guard going up against a top five point guard of all-time who has having the best season of his career looked like a curbstomping in the making. But Parker actually outplaying Kidd in the series while the two went head-to-head was astonishing.

To have expected Parker to outplay Kidd and then be able to have success when the Nets put a taller defender on him while trapping him on pick-and-rolls would have been ludicrous. But somehow that's what history expects out of Parker. I've never understood that or the legend of Speedy Claxton.

I did criticize Parker for not finishing well but that was years later, tbh.

So TP should be expected to compete with guys like Rose then. Especially when TP is in his prime and considered a top 5 pg tbh...

[rascal]

What is a troll account?

[ElNono]

Tbh, I was thrilled with Parker's play against the Nets at the time. A 20-year-old point guard going up against a top five point guard of all-time who has having the best season of his career looked like a curbstomping in the making. But Parker actually outplaying Kidd in the series while the two went head-to-head was astonishing.

To have expected Parker to outplay Kidd and then be able to have success when the Nets put a taller defender on him while trapping him on pick-and-rolls would have been ludicrous. But somehow that's what history expects out of Parker. I've never understood that or the legend of Speedy Claxton.

I did criticize Parker for not finishing well but that was years later, tbh.

tbh, I do have a pile of DVDs to re-watch, but I want to do it when the run is over. I actually hate I don't have more 1st, 2nd and WC finals games recorded.

You tell me 2003 was not that long ago, but it feels like ages to me. I must be getting old.

[timvp]

ducks is actually trolling (rather effectively I might add) pretty much non-stop. It's a bona fide troll account.

ducks is legit. He's a real person and has been posting for as long as I can remember.

[ElNono]

Tony should try the long hair, tbh... Makes great memories

[jestersmash]

ducks is legit. He's a real person and has been posting for as long as I can remember.

Wai..I..wh...*head explodes*

http://verydemotivational.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/demotivational-posters-mind-blown.jpg

[will_spurs]

2006 Recap: [...] Ginobili vs. Mavs.

:lmao :lmao :lmao

[DesignatedT]

Tony has never gotten the respect from Spurs fans that Manu gets and it's pretty fucking retarded. That's just because Manu is hispanic and Tony is french though.

[TD 21]

Yeah, I've noticed this too. He really needs to cut it out, because, as you alluded to, Ginobili's health is a major question mark. He could easily be hurt or injured to the point of not playing during the playoffs and then what? Parker's painted himself into a corner, because he's repeatedly claimed they have no chance at doing anything without Ginobili. So if Ginobili doesn't play during the playoffs, what's he going to tell the media? Surely, he'll pretend as if they still have a chance, but obviously he'll come off as disingenuous. He should be convincing the rest of the team that they can win without Ginobili, as they've shown in going 18-9 without him this season. Instead, he's done the opposite. Not a smart move when you're spearheading a team that doesn't have infinite confidence to begin with.

And as great as Ginobili is, the truth is he's also the most dispensable of the big three. Part of it is the depth on the wings that they currently have and the other part is the fact that he plays the least important position of the three. People have called him the "X-factor" for years and he is, but that's because he's the most injury prone and inconsistent of them. In other words, you had a much better idea of what you'd get out of the other two, but without that third star, they oftentimes seemed vulnerable. So when he was healthy and playing at or close to his peak, they inevitably went up a level and he got all the credit for that. But if either of the other two were as in and out and up and down, the same thing would happen.

[ChumpDumper]

spurfan needs its medications was a better retort tbhspurfan can take either one tbh

[ElNono]

That's just because Manu is hispanic and Tony is french though.

Really?

[roycrikside]

That gives me an idea: Let's break it down by playoff series and see who has been the second banana more often.

2007
Nuggets
Parker
18.2 Points
44.2% FG%
6.8 Assists
3.2 Rebounds
3.0 Turnovers

Ginobili
13.4 Points
33.9% FG%
3.8 Assists
5.0 Rebounds
2.2 Turnovers

Suns
Parker
20.8 Points
45.1% FG%
5.7 Assists
2.8 Rebounds
3.5 Turnovers

Ginobili
17.8 Points
41.0% FG%
4.3 Assists
6.8 Rebounds
1.8 Turnovers

Jazz
Parker
20.2 Points
48.1% FG%
6.8 Assists
2.8 Rebounds
3.6 Turnovers

Ginobili
17.6 Points
48.2% FG%
3.8 Assists
4.0 Rebounds
2.2 Turnovers

Cavs
Parker
24.5 Points
56.8% FG%
3.3 Assists
5.0 Rebounds
3.0 Turnovers

Ginobili
17.8 Points
36.7% FG%
2.5 Assists
5.8 Rebounds
2.3 Turnovers

2007 Recap: Parker takes Nuggets, Suns and Cavs. We'll call the Jazz a tie. Update is Parker 10, Ginobili 9.



L.J. you want to talk about revisionist history in 2003 and how people dismiss Parker, it simply boggles my mind how Parker gets all the plaudits in 2007 and Ginobili's accomplishments in those playoffs have been forgotten.

The averages are so misleading because Ginobili had one really poor game in three of the series, either very early on (Phoenix), or when it was already decided (Denver, Cleveland).

Yet not only did Manu save his best games for when the team absolutely needed them (road wins @Denver in Games 3 and 4, road win @Phoenix game 5 and home vs. Phoenix game 6, road win @Utah game 4), but his +/- and PER (21.9 to 18.7) in those playoffs was considerably higher than Parker's, and PER doesn't even count defense, where obviously Ginobili contributed much more than Parker.

Even in the finals Ginobili played just as well as Parker in Games 1,2, and 4 and did so without the benefit of having Boobie Gibson "guarding" him.

You say that year is 4-1 Parker, with both guys tying in Utah. I think that's far too generous. Really, it's kind to say 4-4. If you actually watched the games and took everything into consideration, it's a joke to say Parker outplayed Ginobili that postseason.

Really, I laugh when people act like 2007 was Tony's best playoffs. He was a lot better in 2008 and 2009. People just don't remember because those years didn't end in titles.

[sehui]

Tony is far more consistent than Ginobili, but you'd have to be crazy to not acknowledge that Ginobili is the key to our success as a team, post Duncan-prime. He is our X-factor, and the game-changer.

[timvp]

L.J. you want to talk about revisionist history in 2003 and how people dismiss Parker, it simply boggles my mind how Parker gets all the plaudits in 2007 and Ginobili's accomplishments in those playoffs have been forgotten. Tbh, nobody ever has anything bad to say about Ginobili regarding the 2007 playoffs even though he was below his normal standards until nine and a half games into those playoffs. I mean, nine and a half games into those playoffs he was averaging less than 13 points while shooting dangerously close to 30%.


The averages are so misleading because Ginobili had one really poor game in three of the series, either very early on (Phoenix)Against the Suns he scored 14 points on 5-for-18 shooting from the field in the first two games of the series COMBINED. In Game 4 he had ten points on 3-for-14 shooting.

Those are three very un-Ginobili-like games.


, or when it was already decided (Denver, Cleveland). Against Denver, he was 4-for-15 in Game 1 and 1-for-8 for four points in Game 5.

Cleveland, yeah he had only one sub par game -- 0-for-7 in Game 3.


Yet not only did Manu save his best games for when the team absolutely needed them (road wins @Denver in Games 3 and 4, road win @Phoenix game 5 and home vs. Phoenix game 6, road win @Utah game 4) Parker was good in Game 3 and 4 vs. Denver and Game 6 vs. Phoenix. Agree that Ginobili basically won Game 5 vs. Phoenix with his play in the second half and Utah Game 4.

But Parker was great when Ginobili wasn't ... like Game 1 vs. the Suns, which was also a huge game. Plus the closeout game against the Jazz and Game 3 against the Cavs.


, but his +/- and PER (21.9 to 18.7) in those playoffs was considerably higher than Parker's, Ginobili having a 17% higher PER is at least partially equalized by Parker playing 25% more minutes.

And as far as plus/minus, against the Suns I remember Ginobili having a negative plus/minus for more than half the series. And the player who really shined in plus/minus that playoffs was Oberto, IIRC.


and PER doesn't even count defense, where obviously Ginobili contributed much more than Parker.PER uses steals and blocks, which gives Ginobili and big advantage over Parker.

And there's no way Ginobili was much better on D than Parker. Against the Nuggets, Parker guarded Iverson while Ginobili guarded Blake. And Parker did really damn good against Iverson.

Against the Suns, Parker shut down Barbosa and did good work on Nash when he had that matchup. Manu guarded .... Raja Bell?

Against the Jazz, Parker erased Derek Fisher from the series and did good work on D-Will. Manu guarded ..... AK47 and Giricek? I don't even remember off the top of my head, tbh.

Against the Cavs, Parker absolutely shut down the opposing starting point guard ... be it Larry Hughes or Boobie. Ginobili was on Pavlovic and D. Jones, IIRC.

There's just no way to say Ginobili was much better on defense than Parker during that run. Parker had the more difficult matchups and did good work. I could buy they were equal depending how much you want to weight team defense ... but thats about as far as I can go.


Even in the finals Ginobili played just as well as Parker in Games 1,2, and 4 and did so without the benefit of having Boobie Gibson "guarding" him. Those Cavs were actually really good at defending point guards. Chauncey Billups sucked in the ECF. Jason Kidd didn't do much against them in the second round. It's not like the Cavs were getting lit up by point guards on a regular basis.


You say that year is 4-1 Parker, with both guys tying in Utah. I think that's far too generous. Really, it's kind to say 4-4. If you actually watched the games and took everything into consideration, it's a joke to say Parker outplayed Ginobili that postseason. There's no way to argue that Ginobili was better than Parker against the Nuggets. Shooting 34% and having much worse assist-to-turnover ratio pretty much makes it impossible to argue otherwise. Especially when you factor in who each was defending.

Against the Suns, Ginobili was AMAZING in the second half of Game 5 and might have had his best game ever in Game 6. But for three of the six games, Ginobili was undeniably sub par any way you look at it -- stats, plus/minus, etc. To give that series to Parker isn't much of a stretch.

Parker won the MVP against the Cavs and Manu had an 0fer in a four game series so don't really see the way to give that one to Ginobili.

The Jazz was pretty damn close.

I'll look at the series grades I did during the time but I'm pretty sure they show the same opinions.

Don't get me wrong, Ginobili was great in those playoffs all things considered. Starting in the second half of Game 5 against the Suns until the end of the playoffs, he was pretty damn close to 2005 level. Plus his play in Game 6 against the Suns might have been the best game out of any Spur since Duncan in 2003.

[therealtruth]

Tbh, I was thrilled with Parker's play against the Nets at the time. A 20-year-old point guard going up against a top five point guard of all-time who has having the best season of his career looked like a curbstomping in the making. But Parker actually outplaying Kidd in the series while the two went head-to-head was astonishing.

To have expected Parker to outplay Kidd and then be able to have success when the Nets put a taller defender on him while trapping him on pick-and-rolls would have been ludicrous. But somehow that's what history expects out of Parker. I've never understood that or the legend of Speedy Claxton.

I did criticize Parker for not finishing well but that was years later, tbh.

Parker's problem is that he's at times created expectations with his game that he isn't able to live up to when the defense accounts for him more. The one definition of a superstar is that no matter what you throw at them they find a counter that works just as well. Parker doesn't have that. When you seal the paint he basically becomes ineffective.

[roycrikside]

I'm just saying that Manu's best games in those playoffs were the critical ones, games that had the Spurs lost they would've been trailing late in series. Their two most important games were Game 5 @Phx and Game 4 @Utah and he was big in both. Game 3 @Den too.

[therealtruth]

Those Cavs were actually really good at defending point guards. Chauncey Billups sucked in the ECF. Jason Kidd didn't do much against them in the second round. It's not like the Cavs were getting lit up by point guards on a regular basis.


Didn't Larry Hughes get injured before the Finals? When healthy he was first team all defense but he was basically hobbling in the Finals. Maybe that has something to do with why Parker was so good and the other pg's weren't.

[therealtruth]

I'm just saying that Manu's best games in those playoffs were the critical ones, games that had the Spurs lost they would've been trailing late in series. Their two most important games were Game 5 @Phx and Game 4 @Utah and he was big in both. Game 3 @Den too.

That's another important distiction between Manu and Parker. Manu always played big in the big games. Parker seemed to shrink from the moment. He could start a playoff series on fire but once the defense adjusted he would run into trouble and it would seem like he was shrinking from the moment. Manu was huge at making the big plays at the big moments in the series.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm just saying that Manu's best games in those playoffs were the critical ones, games that had the Spurs lost they would've been trailing late in series. Their two most important games were Game 5 @Phx and Game 4 @Utah and he was big in both. Game 3 @Den too.

How about the argument that if Manu had shown up in all of the games and not had some really bad ones then the Spurs "critical" games aren't as critical?

Manu's lucky that he automatically gets better treatment than Tony. I honestly don't know why thats the case, but I worry about Tony's safety had he been the one to foul Dirk in 2006.

[roycrikside]

How about the argument that if Manu had shown up in all of the games and not had some really bad ones then the Spurs "critical" games aren't as critical?

Manu's lucky that he automatically gets better treatment than Tony. I honestly don't know why thats the case, but I worry about Tony's safety had he been the one to foul Dirk in 2006.

Such a stupid argument.

For one, Manu had some leeway with Spurs fans because he was either the main reason they won in 2005 or 1-B, and 1-A wasn't Tony, so be real.

For two, the only reason that Dallas series even got to Game 7 in SA was because Manu played a great game in Game 6 while Tony shat the bed.

For three, it was a Manu three in Game 7 that gave the team their short-lived lead against Dallas, and he did most of his damage in that game in the fourth quarter.

Finally, as costly as it was, it was still a play that was borne of trying too hard, rather than not try at all. Only dumb fans and dumber coaches get on players for playing hard. If you want to know why fans have always been more drawn to Manu and Tony, it's because he puts his body on the line defensively and takes those big charges, gets those key, momentum-turning blocks and steals. He lays out to save balls from going out of bounds. Parker is a great player, but he's just not wired that way. He'll only put his body on the line in the name of getting himself a lay-up or a trip to the line. Defensively, he sometimes he hustles and stays in front of his man, but he doesn't change games on that end of the floor. He just doesn't.

[MannyIsGod]

:lol

That post is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

[will_spurs]

:lol

That post is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

The Spurs should sell some Manu-colored glasses, so that fans could see the world all Manu, all the time :lol

[ElNono]

No glasses required, tbh :lol

[will_spurs]

No glasses required, tbh :lol

I'm sure you can manage to squeeze a bit more Manu into your life :lol

[The ADMIRAL 50]

Good thing Manu's wife isn't much of a looker so the pope of CoM won't run into any drama there. :downspin:

:flag:

really?

http://ballerwives.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Manu-Ginobili-Wife-Marianela-Orono-2.jpg

[TJastal]

really?

http://ballerwives.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Manu-Ginobili-Wife-Marianela-Orono-2.jpg

Wow, she's a cutie damn. Cane must have a preference for the plumper ones. No doubt he gets his jollies "Pumping bacon", after rolling 'em in flour first.

[TJastal]

Hey Cane, you and TheBigFundamental should go hoggin' some time. You guys can even take turns "pumping the bacon".

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Wow, six pages

[roycrikside]

:lol

That post is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

You're the least credible person to talk about Manu outside of Ducks. You're still sore at the guy because he didn't tip you. :lol

[timvp]

Speaking of the 2007 playoffs, here's an interesting way to look at the Big 3's production. I took the equation for PER but didn't equalize the minutes (since there's no point to equalize the minutes between those three because Pop is going to play them the most possible minutes come playoff time). Here's the results over the course of the 2007 playoffs:

http://oi43.tinypic.com/23moexl.jpg

First of all, Duncan was so much better than Ginobili and Parker that they don't even belong in the same conversation. Secondly, it's hilarious that people argued Ginobili vs. Parker when they basically carried the same workload. When Ginobili struggled, Parker picked it up ... and vice versa.

[ElNono]

Speaking of the 2007 playoffs, here's an interesting way to look at the Big 3's production. I took the equation for PER but didn't equalize the minutes (since there's no point to equalize the minutes between those three because Pop is going to play them the most possible minutes come playoff time). Here's the results over the course of the 2007 playoffs:

http://oi43.tinypic.com/23moexl.jpg

First of all, Duncan was so much better than Ginobili and Parker that they don't even belong in the same conversation. Secondly, it's hilarious that people argued Ginobili vs. Parker when they basically carried the same workload. When Ginobili struggled, Parker picked it up ... and vice versa.

But Manu's production could've been much better if Tony would've passed him the ball more, tbh

[ChumpDumper]

So they were about the same, but Manu was better at being the same.

[FkLA]

Parker had guys like Steve Blake, Steve Nash, and Boobie Gibson guarding him throughout those playoffs. :lol

[FkLA]

Would like to see a graph of the 2005 playoffs when you have some time, mr timvp. Kinda CoP of you to use 07' when that was supposedly Parkers year because of so many favorable matchups (and even then its pretty even :lol).

[roycrikside]

Speaking of the 2007 playoffs, here's an interesting way to look at the Big 3's production. I took the equation for PER but didn't equalize the minutes (since there's no point to equalize the minutes between those three because Pop is going to play them the most possible minutes come playoff time). Here's the results over the course of the 2007 playoffs:

http://oi43.tinypic.com/23moexl.jpg

First of all, Duncan was so much better than Ginobili and Parker that they don't even belong in the same conversation. Secondly, it's hilarious that people argued Ginobili vs. Parker when they basically carried the same workload. When Ginobili struggled, Parker picked it up ... and vice versa.


Hey short term memory loss, that was my whole point. You gave the '07 postseason to Parker over Ginobili 4-1. I said they should be tied at worst. So now you admit it. You're welcome.

[will_spurs]

So they were about the same, but Manu was better at being the same.

That, or you're just not very good at reading graphs.

[Pauleta14]

Parker had guys like Steve Blake, Steve Nash, and Boobie Gibson guarding him throughout those playoffs. :lol

Don't forget to take into account the fact that a PG has the most difficult job on the floor and the giggest load of work...:wakeup

[timvp]

Hey short term memory loss, that was my whole point. You gave the '07 postseason to Parker over Ginobili 4-1. I said they should be tied at worst. So now you admit it. You're welcome.

Tbh, I was going by series. The graph shows Parker "won" the Nuggets series and the Cavs series ... and shows the Jazz series was a tie. Against the Suns, Manu exploded in the second half of Game 5 and in Game 6 (Manu's PER for Game 6 was 50.99 :wow -- haven't checked but that might be the record for a Spurs playoff game) but otherwise Parker "won" that series too.

For the record, PER isn't a very good formula to judge Spurs players. I like it in general to use league-wide -- I especially like it because it makes David Robinson look like one of the best players ever and Manu Ginobili one of best shooting guards of all-time -- but for intra-squad rankings, it isn't too useful because it loves things that Pop doesn't actually love (steals, offensive rebounds) and doesn't care about some things are useful in Pop's system (field goal percentage, generic two-point baskets ... and basic man-to-man defense, obviously).

Speaking of PER and Ginobili, the only shooting guards he trails in the last 35 years are Jordan, Wade and Kobe :flag:

[TDMVPDPOY]

what ppl forget is parker usually gets his, but the other teams pg usually torches him for a career game/series...only for pop to clear the bench pg to take over...

same cant be said about ginoboli besides his kryptonite is injuries...

[therealtruth]

Parker had guys like Steve Blake, Steve Nash, and Boobie Gibson guarding him throughout those playoffs. :lol

I wonder what would have happened if he had a healthy first team all defense Larry Hughes guarding him.

[roycrikside]

Speaking of PER and Ginobili, the only shooting guards he trails in the last 35 years are Jordan, Wade and Kobe :flag:

As it should be. I guess I'd take Drexler in his prime over Manu (it's close), but I'd definitely take Ginobili over the likes of Reggie Miller, Joe Dumars and Ray Allen. Anyone before 1984, I don't know about.

[TDMVPDPOY]

every time com and cop arguments

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lyln2d69JH1qdlh1io1_400.gif

[MannyIsGod]

You're the least credible person to talk about Manu outside of Ducks. You're still sore at the guy because he didn't tip you. :lol

I love Manu as a player. Its you fuckers who hate on Parker to elevate Manu that I hate.

[MannyIsGod]

But Manu's production could've been much better if Tony would've passed him the ball more, tbh


So they were about the same, but Manu was better at being the same.

:lol

10/10

[Kori Ellis]

By the way, Manu was way too CoP in his post game interview tonight. ;)

[roycrikside]

I love Manu as a player. Its you fuckers who hate on Parker to elevate Manu that I hate.

Nobody's hating on Tony. He's playing great. But this whole thread by LJ was really stupid. It was just a trolling thread. Manu loves Tony, Tony loves Manu, blah blah blah.

Apparently he wants the Spurs to be like the '04 Lakers where our stars hate each other. So dumb.

[TMTTRIO]

What do you expect Manu to say. He's at the end of his career and knows he can't be relied on to carry the team anymore.

[100%duncan]

Parker knows the truth. We win with Manu, we lose with Manu.

[TDMVPDPOY]

What do you expect Manu to say. He's at the end of his career and knows he can't be relied on to carry the team anymore.

it be sweet if he trolled us and not give credit where its due, while saying it was a teams effort and FO should pass the torch to KL