Ginobili can't lead a bench anymore

[freetiago]

he did a solid job the past 2 years but he also played with Tiago and had Bonners floor spacing
without a stretch 4 he cant get in the lane and he throws skip passes 90% of the time which get read most of the time
needs to be used as a role player now
Popovich will have to have one of Parker/Splitter on the floor at all times now

[TheGoldStandard]

Tonights game is a clear indication that we exhuded a lot of energy last night against OKC, it's a trap game. Manu has his moments and he can still lead off the bench but some of his choices need to be reeled in by playoff time.

[hater]

he's done. anyone who thinks otherwise needs to make an appt with a team of psychologists.

yes he will have a nice streak every now and then. but Pop please stop relying on this turnover machine.

[Chinook]

If we were to analogize Ginobili as a car, I'd say that he's not run down yet, but he is broken. He still has some basketball left physically, but I'm not sure he has it in him to dial down and play within his limits. He's not aging gracefully, and I don't think he'd make a good non-star, now that he's not an energy player.

[TheGoldStandard]

He has flashes now and again and he's a better option then going with Neal. Once TP comes back he'll reign it in.

[ElNono]

People that think we lost because of Manu are really missing the forest for the tree... Manu was bad tonight, but not the reason we lost...

The reason:
M. Bonner 1-4
T. Splitter 1-10
D. Green 4-10
G. Neal 0-2
B. Diaw 2-7
P. Mills 1-4

That's a combined 9-37 (24%)

(doesn't include garbage time)

[cd98]

He's been up and down all year. I wonder what kind of contract offer he gets. Does he get a big contract to make up for years of giving the Spurs a discount? They won't get the value if they pay him big 3 money.

[TheGoldStandard]

Exactly what ElNono said, when nobody hits a shot you can't win.

[TheGoldStandard]

He's been up and down all year. I wonder what kind of contract offer he gets. Does he get a big contract to make up for years of giving the Spurs a discount? They won't get the value if they pay him big 3 money.


He'll get 5 mil a season for 2 more seasons.

[ElNono]

He's been up and down all year. I wonder what kind of contract offer he gets. Does he get a big contract to make up for years of giving the Spurs a discount? They won't get the value if they pay him big 3 money.

He'll get less than Tim, which is where he should be at this point in time...

[pgardn]

I think this is further evidence that his role as a leader of the 2nd unit needs to change. He really has to pick his spots when driving, he cant just make up stuff on a consistent basis anymore while going to the hoop. I still trust him as a distributor when he is not trying to do too much. And he can still hit the open 3. The step back is gone.

bottom line: We still gotta have him. But this season has to teach him about his limitations. Each year his stride gets shorter and his agility declines. He can age gracefully and productively once he realizes this.

[cd98]

I'd also note as bad as he's played, he still can create his own shot and shots for others. Not a lot of guys can do it on this team. He's still valuable, if inconsistent.


Also, it's a team game. All the guys played bad. Including up and coming Tiago Splitter who destroyed Ibacka and then got killed by Sistema.

[jimbo]

I think the point wasn't that he was the reason for the loss, but that he didn't look like a difference maker on the floor. He just wasn't good enough to rally the Spurs in the least.

[Splits]

He'll get 5 mil a season for 2 more seasons.

All depends on playoff minutes/health/performance. Regular season doesn't mean that much when you've got a top 2 seed on lockdown.

[hater]

ElNono, I heard Johns Hopkins is paying money for volunteers for a new study. the subject is "the human brain and extreme stages of delusion"

give them a call

:lol :lol :lol

[pgardn]

I feel sorry for him given that he competes so fully. He gives everything he has physically and he just is not the same man. Its hard getting old. Basketball is THE sport to tell you things are not the same physically. The great humbler this game.

[Russ]

But he can still go one on five to end a quarter (he just can't carry a depleted squad on a back-to-back on the road).

[TheGoldStandard]

I think the point wasn't that he was the reason for the loss, but that he didn't look like a difference maker on the floor. He just wasn't good enough to rally the Spurs in the least.

Nobody was a difference maker tonight, big hangover loss on this b2b especially after winning against OKC. He'll be fine, he'll reign it in when Parker is back. He's trying to do way too much and is out of control when trying to lead everyone.

[freetiago]

ive been saying Ginobili's been trash the entire season
this game was so bad it was worthy of making a thread about it
spurfan can play the non issue, one game, hes tired hes been playing 20 minutes with timeouts and halftimes every other day excuses but you deep down no he just isnt the same player anymore
at 36 it is to be expected
i should probably add Leonard should be with the bench more as well with offense run through him
and not through the other TOSB Jackson who manages to ruin his one good game of the year by complaining about every single call
cant believe the pussy refs havent given him a tech yet

also add that since Tiago has gone to the starting lineup the bench as gone downhill fast
spurs had the leading bench in the nba ppg wise at one point now theyre sitting at around 6-7th and its getting worse every game

[ElNono]

If anything, this game is further proof we need Manu and Tiago to play well, because the vaunted 'depth' is non-existent...

[hater]

watch Timvp give him a C :lmao

[ElNono]

ElNono, I heard Johns Hopkins is paying money for volunteers for a new study. the subject is "the human brain and extreme stages of delusion"

Did I post anything not factual? :lol

I haven't even said Manu played great or anything....

[pgardn]

If anything, this game is further proof we need Manu and Tiago to play well, because the vaunted 'depth' is non-existent...

Very nice point as well.

[Chinook]

The Spurs can win with Ginobili, and they might be able to win without him, but they can't win despite him. As I said in the game thread, when Ginobili is playing poorly, he's like a sickness that hangs over the team. He earned every point of his plus-minus tonight.

[hater]

Did I post anything not factual? :lol

I haven't even said Manu played great or anything....

You think Manu didn't play horrible today or yesterday for starters

[SanDiegoSpursFan]

Ginobili was just giving a confidence boost to Kawhi and Timmy. Only a leader would do that.

[TheGoldStandard]

We're talking about this because of the let down tonight but give it a few more games and Manu will have a decent night and we'll have posts about him not being washed up. He's 36, still can be productive for that age and can still do more than half the players in the league who are in there 20's.

[pgardn]

watch Timvp give him a C :lmao

Jesus the over use of the smiley.

Technical. Get off the board.

[ElNono]

You think Manu didn't play horrible today or yesterday for starters


Manu was bad tonight

I'm starting to think your reading is as bad as your predictions, tbh...

[hater]

I'm starting to think your reading is as bad as your predictions, tbh...

And you think he's not been horrible all season. He's finished and is more of a liability than an asset. Sorry to break it to you.

[jag]

Manu is definitely not "done," but he can no longer be counted on to consistently provide a certain type of production. If he puts up big numbers... great. If not, it shouldn't be surprising.

[hater]

ball moves better when manu is running the PG spot anyways...

:lmao

[pgardn]

We're talking about this because of the let down tonight but give it a few more games and Manu will have a decent night and we'll have posts about him not being washed up. He's 36, still can be productive for that age and can still do more than half the players in the league who are in there 20's.

True.

But its not our Ginobili. His role has got to change. He tries to do too much because he competes so hard. Part of being a competitor is a degree of stubborness.

[SanDiegoSpursFan]

I think Ginobili just needs to realize that he doesn't have to dominate the ball every possession for the bench to be effective.

[TheGoldStandard]

Manu is definitely not "done," but he can no longer be counted on to consistently provide a certain type of production. If he puts up big numbers... great. If not, it shouldn't be surprising.

I agree with this, at 36 he's still very viable for a spark and output off the bench but he's not averaging 20 a game.

[ElNono]

And you think he's not been horrible all season. He's finished and is more of a liability than an asset. Sorry to break it to you.

Production-wise, he's still the 3rd best Spur player this season. Factual. (http://www.82games.com/1213/1213SAS.HTM)

Your takes are generally terrible, so your opinion is largely unimportant, as usual.

[ElNono]

Manu is definitely not "done," but he can no longer be counted on to consistently provide a certain type of production. If he puts up big numbers... great. If not, it shouldn't be surprising.

Pretty much what I told DPG on the game thread. Spurs will need more from Kawhi (missing today) and Green (didn't shoot great today) at this stage.

[pgardn]

:lmao

Ya cant help yourself.
Step back from the smileys.
Admit addiction.

[TheGoldStandard]

True.

But its not our Ginobili. His role has got to change. He tries to do too much because he competes so hard. Part of being a competitor is a degree of stubborness.

Yes, but a lot of the recent inconsistancy is because Pop wants him to have the ball in his hands with the second team and then wants him to play with the starters etc. When TP comes back he'll get back into bench play and will spark it when he has to. I wonder how many minutes he'll get during the playoffs, Green has been a lot better lately and Kawhi is solid.

[Pop]

ive been saying Ginobili's been trash the entire season
this game was so bad it was worthy of making a thread about it
spurfan can play the non issue, one game, hes tired hes been playing 20 minutes with timeouts and halftimes every other day excuses but you deep down no he just isnt the same player anymore
at 36 it is to be expected
i should probably add Leonard should be with the bench more as well with offense run through him
and not through the other TOSB Jackson who manages to ruin his one good game of the year by complaining about every single call
cant believe the pussy refs havent given him a tech yet

also add that since Tiago has gone to the starting lineup the bench as gone downhill fast
spurs had the leading bench in the nba ppg wise at one point now theyre sitting at around 6-7th and its getting worse every game

Yeah Sjax and Manu seem like a bad combination of turnover prone players to me but I don't think there's an easy fix for that one, next year I'd play Boris at the backup 3 after he loses some more weight and let Jax walk.

But they should have been playing Baynes as Tim backup since the very day he got here. Tim looks bad/tired as well anyway so the 3 big men rotation doesn't sound like a very smart idea at this point and our rebounding is still subpar especially with Tiago/Diaw together, would give the bench a big target as well on O.

[ElNono]

Normally you would move Manu to the starting lineup to reduce his ball-handling role a bit, but the problem is that Green isn't really a shot creator. So the Spurs are kind of stuck there.

[freetiago]

Ginobilis advanced stats are padded playing against scrubs and projected over the course how ever many minutes they use for these made up stats
the fact that he is a liability vs the 10 day contracters the wolves were throwing out there tells it all

Ginobili should be with the starters but at this point its to late
he has terrible numbers with the starting lineup and green is doing well enough is his place
vs the Lakers Popovich will need to start him though to take advantage of Nash
Ginobili could still start and play with the bench and so could Tiago
but Popovich has completely given up on the idea of micromanaging his frontline and will roll with the turds for 10 minute stretches
doubt hell add micromanaging the 2 spot on top of that

[007nites]

I think Manu transferred his talents over to Kawhi. Kind of like that ball in Spacejam

[TheGoldStandard]

Tim won't play b2b games, Baynes will get his next season after a camp and he starts to develop more. Jax needs to stay, we're short on wing players who can actually play physical and I don't see us drafting or bringing anyone over this offseason or exploring free agency. Jax will take a paycut and stay on

[ElNono]

Ginobilis advanced stats are padded playing against scrubs and projected over the course how ever many minutes they use for these made up stats
the fact that he is a liability vs the 10 day contracters the wolves were throwing out there shows tell it all

Only one player shot worse than Gino tonight... it's on your nickname... the same guy that had a double-double last night against OKC...

[Ellsworth]

Luv his competitiveness, but he's getting older now & his overall game isn't as what it used to be... one would think he'd be playing smarter out there, instead he's just making way too many mistakes with all those difficult passes turning into turnovers, missed free throws, & so on.
KL should be ahead of him now as the 3rd option on offense (the kid should have been in the lineup tonight instead... looks like Pop is more worried about KL getting injured than Manu in the big picture; if so, then I can live with tonight's loss).

[Pop]

Normally you would move Manu to the starting lineup to reduce his ball-handling role a bit, but the problem is that Green isn't really a shot creator. So the Spurs are kind of stuck there.

Yes I think it's the one move that could work but Pop I think don't want his beloved Danny to lose confidence so I don't see it. Like freetiago said, make KY the bench leader in that case, with Joseph bringing up the ball and letting him make plays. But that gets complicated rotation wise.

Tim Baynes
Tiago Boris
KY taken out early for SJax, come back for whoever is playing worse of Manu/Sjax when TP comes out
Manu Green
TP Cojo

[RD2191]

we just got screwed by the refs tbh, manu and tiago were both getting hacked and the refs weren't calling shit

[pgardn]

Yes, but a lot of the recent inconsistancy is because Pop wants him to have the ball in his hands with the second team and then wants him to play with the starters etc. When TP comes back he'll get back into bench play and will spark it when he has to. I wonder how many minutes he'll get during the playoffs, Green has been a lot better lately and Kawhi is solid.


He cant go wild man to the basket anymore. He was so athletic he would draw a foul or even an and one. But now its a block and back the other way. He has got to be smarter with his penetrations. He is physically not the same man. I expect him to adjust. He is too thoughtful after the games, he cares too much. He watches film talks with Pop and he finds his way.

[hater]

I been saying it from day 1 of this season. Manu needs to adjust his game a la Jason Kidd, and stay away from trying to play through his body like Kobe. Unfortunately he seems psychologically incapable of adjusting. It's pathetic and sad to watch tbh

[Bruno]

Ginobili has been a major disappointment for a year and a half. If he wants to get a new good contract, he better have great playoffs because, otherwise, they are no way you can justified Spurs offering him an above average salary.

[TheGoldStandard]

He cant go wild man to the basket anymore. He was so athletic he would draw a foul or even an and one. But now its a block and back the other way. He has got to be smarter with his penetrations. He is physically not the same man. I expect him to adjust. He is too thoughtful after the games, he cares too much. He watches film talks with Pop and he finds his way.

That can be said about a lot of the Spurs, I remember TP living at the line when he'd drive, when Tim came into the league he could get the call same with Manu and now not so much. I think he'll adjust but the problem is he has flashes which can trick you into believing that you still have the same ability you had 5 or 6 years ago. I think it'll take the offseason especially with the contract deal for him to really see what game he has left.

[superjames1992]

he did a solid job the past 2 years but he also played with Tiago and had Bonners floor spacing
without a stretch 4 he cant get in the lane and he throws skip passes 90% of the time which get read most of the time
needs to be used as a role player now
Popovich will have to have one of Parker/Splitter on the floor at all times now
Right, it didn't have anything to do with the fact that almost no one on the team could hit a shot.

[Budkin]

He's a warrior but needs to adapt his game. Also B2Bs just kill him.

[ElNono]

What's becoming clear is that outside TP/TD/Manu/Kawhi/Tiago and to an extent Green, this team is solid garbage. I'll leave out CoJo and Baynes because they just walked into the team. Even Neal looks questionable as far as playing any kind of extended minutes.

[timtonymanu]

What's becoming clear is that outside TP/TD/Manu/Kawhi and to an extent Green, this team is solid garbage. I'll leave out CoJo and Baynes because they just walked into the team. Even Neal looks questionable as far as playing any kind of extended minutes.

Tiago?

[jag]

Pretty much what I told DPG on the game thread. Spurs will need more from Kawhi (missing today) and Green (didn't shoot great today) at this stage.

Yep. I said this a while ago when someone was bitching about Manu playing poorly during a game when Tony also played poorly. Some people think Pop should have some secret Soviet strategy to lead the Spurs to wins when Tony doesn't play well, or is faced with a tough matchup (like Sefolosha). Unless Tony goes for 35/game during the postseason, you're gong to have to get big contributions from Manu. When Manu can't do it, it's going to have to be Green. It's already a given that Splitter and Kawhi are going to have to be steady contributors.

I'm not saying anything that isn't obvious. But I just want to make the point that there really isn't a "Big 3" anymore. It has to be a total team effort. When one or two guys have off days, Tony is going to have to go for big numbers. It's not like the old days when you could count on Tim, Manu AND Tony to pick up everyone else's slack. That's what separates the Spurs from teams like the Heat and Thunder. Minimal contributions from a guy like Chalmers can put the Heat over the top. The Spurs need more than just one "extra" guy pitching in.

[ElNono]

Tiago?

yeah, just edited the post

[ElNono]

Yep. I said this a while ago when someone was bitching about Manu playing poorly during a game when Tony also played poorly. Some people think Pop should have some secret Soviet strategy to lead the Sours to wins when Tony doesn't play well, or is faced with a tough matchup (like Sefolosha). Unless Tony goes for 35/game during the postseason, you're gong to have to get big contributions from Manu. When Manu can't do it, it's going to have to be Green. It's already a given that Splitter and Kawhi are going to have to be steady contributors.

I'm not saying anything that isn't obvious. But I just want to make the point that there really isn't a "Big 3" anymore. It has to be a total team effort. When one or two guys have off days, Tony is going to have to go for big numbers. It's not like the old days when you could count on Tim, Manu AND Tony to pick up everyone else's slack. That's what separates the Spurs from teams like the Heat and Thunder. Minimal contributions from a guy like Chalmers can put the Heat over the top. The Spurs need more than just one "extra" guy pitching in.

The 'star' of this team has been the 'system' since Tim declined. So yeah, completely agree. Unfortunately, when the 'system' breaks down, we're much more easy to prey on.

[Chinook]

Ginobili has been a major disappointment for a year and a half. If he wants to get a new good contract, he better have great playoffs because, otherwise, they are no way you can justified Spurs offering him an above average salary.

B-b-b-b-but... the win-shares...

[hater]

The 'star' of this team has been the 'system' since Tim declined. So yeah, completely agree. Unfortunately, when the 'system' breaks down, we're much more easy to prey on.

sigh, Parker has been the star Nono :rolleyes

[ElNono]

sigh, Parker has been the star Nono :rolleyes

He's been the best player. He's not a star though, and I mean no disrespect with that (I'll add Manu never been a star caliber player either).

Franchise player was Tim. And he got old.

[pgardn]

Tony being out is clearly exposing our weaknesses. We do need a team effort. Leonard, Tiago, and Green, in that order, are going to have to play well in the playoffs when we get past the first round. I still think we are a better team than last year.

[jag]

The 'star' of this team has been the 'system' since Tim declined. So yeah, completely agree. Unfortunately, when the 'system' breaks down, we're much more easy to prey on.

For the last 3 years, the 'star' of the team has been Tony captaining the offense and Tim anchoring the defense. Now Tim has some help. Tony is going to need some too.

[hater]

He's been the best player. He's not a star though, and I mean no disrespect with that (I'll add Manu never been a star caliber player either).

Franchise player was Tim. And he got old.

Parker is not a star? mmm ok. and this is on the same thread you claim you are not delusional. :rolleyes

[pgardn]

He's been the best player. He's not a star though, and I mean no disrespect with that (I'll add Manu never been a star caliber player either).

Franchise player was Tim. And he got old.

Very true.

We got lucky to see him play so many seasons. If he played in NY and brought 4 championships, he would be God.

[TampaDude]

Just for the record, the three active NBA players with the highest win % are Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili.

[jag]

He's been the best player. He's not a star though, and I mean no disrespect with that (I'll add Manu never been a star caliber player either).

Franchise player was Tim. And he got old.

Tony has been successful within the system, but Tony doesn't need the system to be successful. The system has been great, but Tony has carried the team during periods when Manu and Tim were sidelined, and "the system" consisted of him matching opposing stars basket for basket. He's not a star for doing it a few times over the past few seasons, he's a star for doing consistently over the past few seasons.

[freetiago]

Thread derailed

point of the thread is Manu cant be the sole shot creator/ball handler on the floor
Tiago with him in the pick and rolls which is still questionable since Turnobili will still skip pass it or turn it over
Tiago in the post
Leonard in the pick and roll/post
extended minutes for Parker to play with the bench
or early subs out for parker to play with the bench more

[ElNono]

For the last 3 years, the 'star' of the team has been Tony captaining the offense and Tim anchoring the defense. Now Tim has some help. Tony is going to need some too.

It's the system, IMO. Obviously you have more or less talented players. It's the reason we could offset cancers like Mason JR or RJ and still win 50 games.


Parker is not a star? mmm ok. and this is on the same thread you claim you are not delusional. :rolleyes

There's nothing delusional about it. I'm talking franchise-caliber players. On the Spurs in the past 9 years, that's only Tim.

If you want to say 'All-Star', sure, we had a few. But this league always been about franchise-caliber players, and the Spurs really haven't had one in years. The system is what keeps the team on a winning rampage (at least regular season).

[cd021]

he's done. anyone who thinks otherwise needs to make an appt with a team of psychologists.

yes he will have a nice streak every now and then. but Pop please stop relying on this turnover machine.

Manu is high risk high reward player at this point in his career. He can take over games in stretches. He is assist & T.O rate are both at career highs. In terms of PER 36- 7.1 asts/ 3.3 T.O.

The bench is much less potent without him. Jackson, Diaw, Neal. You can't tell me he doesn't make them better by just being on the floor. At the very least he draws attention from defenses because he can attack the rim or pull up for a 3. Thats why Blair and Splitter play so well with him. He is hard to stop when he is running the P&R.

[ElNono]

Tony has been successful within the system, but Tony doesn't need the system to be successful. The system has been great, but Tony has carried the team during periods when Manu and Tim were sidelined, and "the system" consisted of him matching opposing stars basket for basket. He's not a star for doing it a few times over the past few seasons, he's a star for doing consistently over the past few seasons.

IMO, Tony moves to a situation like Deron did, and he doesn't win 50 games season after season and makes the playoffs consistently. There's no way to prove it, but that particular case to me it's pretty close as far as moving from a solid, stable system and role to taking over a franchise.

EDIT: And I mean no slight to Tony, or are not trying to downplay his talent. He's definitely all-star caliber, and to be frank there's only very few franchise talent in the league as a whole.

[freetiago]

and LOL at people always saying its the system
the system is tim tony and manu
they run pick and rolls and draw help
who kick it out to open players
thats the system
other offball movement and cuts outside of pick and rolls is the spurs system
its just playing smart basketball
the system cant be run without Tim Tony and Manu doing there thing
or now it cant be run without Tim and Tony

[pgardn]

Tony has been successful within the system, but Tony doesn't need the system to be successful. The system has been great, but Tony has carried the team during periods when Manu and Tim were sidelined, and "the system" consisted of him matching opposing stars basket for basket. He's not a star for doing it a few times over the past few seasons, he's a star for doing consistently over the past few seasons.

The definition of what a star is...?

Top 20 in the NBA all time?

Only Duncan makes that list.

Is Parker more of a star than Chauncey Billups to all who have watched the NBA for 15 years?

[jag]

It's absurd to say that Tony hasn't been the star of the team because he isn't a "franchise player" like Duncan. You won't find 10 other players in the history of the game who have been franchise players like Duncan.

[cd021]

There's nothing delusional about it. I'm talking franchise-caliber players. On the Spurs in the past 9 years, that's only Tim.

If you want to say 'All-Star', sure, we had a few. But this league always been about franchise-caliber players, and the Spurs really haven't had one in years. The system is what keeps the team on a winning rampage (at least regular season).

Parker is a star. This really isn't debatable. He also the best PG in the league. 21pts, 53% FG 7.7 asts. He is the only player not named Lebron putting up those numbers. He finished 5th in MVP voting and is likely to finish 3rd this season. At the very least he is a star.

[Pasta Batman]

He's not done, but he can't do big minutes. CJ is valuable in that he can run the PG to save Manu some energy in the post season.

[jag]

If Manu had done what Tony has done for the past three seasons, there'd be a Spurstalk sponsored statue of Manu near the Alamo. How many times does Tony have to come in the top 10 in MVP voting to be considered a "star"?

[BatManu20]

Just for the record, the three active NBA players with the highest win % are Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili.

:tu

[pgardn]

It's absurd to say that Tony hasn't been the star of the team because he isn't a "franchise player" like Duncan. You won't find 10 other players in the history of the game who have been franchise players like Duncan.


I will buy that then. Billups was a star for the Pistons. Same with Rip Hamilton. Stars..

[jag]

Is Parker more of a star than Chauncey Billups to all who have watched the NBA for 15 years?

wtf did I just read?

[hater]

top 3 pg in the league is not a star

:lol

[jag]

Yes, youre right.

Rip Hamilton's career = Tony's career

There have only been 20 star players in NBA history. I hope The Admiral makes the list.

[ElNono]

It's absurd to say that Tony hasn't been the star of the team because he isn't a "franchise player" like Duncan. You won't find 10 other players in the history of the game who have been franchise players like Duncan.

Well, it depends on how you define 'star'... To me, Duncan, Durant, Kobe, Lebron, Shaq, Robinson... those are stars... franchise caliber players, IMO.

It's entirely possible you define it in a different way.


Parker is a star. This really isn't debatable. He also the best PG in the league. 21pts, 53% FG 7.7 asts. He is the only player not named Lebron putting up those numbers. He finished 5th in MVP voting and is likely to finish 3rd this season. At the very least he is a star.

Disagree. I think CP3 is the best PG in the league.


If Manu had done what Tony has done for the past three seasons, there'd be a Spurstalk sponsored statue of Manu near the Alamo. How many times does Tony have to come in the top 10 in MVP voting to be considered a "star"?

Manu was an All-Star too exactly 3 seasons ago, a season where TP didn't make it. And nobody is getting a statue other then Duncan, IMO.

[jag]

I'm going to sleep. Tomorrow morning I'll check out the rest of your takes on how Ben Gordon's career = Tony's career.

[ElNono]

For comparison, Westbrook isn't a 'star' under my criteria either. You couldn't build a franchise around him and win at the same pace the Thunder are winning if Durant wouldn't be there.

[ElNono]

I'm going to sleep. Tomorrow morning I'll check out the rest of your takes on how Ben Gordon's career = Tony's career.

That's your argument. AFAIK, Ben Gordon never been an All-Star, so he would be below Tony.

[ducks]

manu is done should have been traded for haren last year



most here that that the thunder would be getting a steal

[superjames1992]

manu is done should have been traded for haren last year



most here that that the thunder would be getting a steal

Trollololololololol!!! :lol

Glad to have you back.

[hater]

For comparison, Westbrook isn't a 'star' under my criteria either. You couldn't build a franchise around him and win at the same pace the Thunder are winning if Durant wouldn't be there.

so under your criteria, the NBA as of right now is composed of no more than 5 stars and the rest are non-stars correct?

funny so wade is not a star either cause he would not lead a team to a win rate similar to the thunder apparently :lol

[team-work]

It doesn't need a statistician to explain how unscientific it is to draw conclusion based on one game.

If the OP is true, how about the first the first 2 games or so when TP is out (Manu > LeBron :lol)

[freetiago]

Spliter is Garbage 1-10 shooting, blocked 5 times, 0 blocks. 7 ft tall and can't even avg 1 block a game. Can't even follow up his 1 good game of his carrier with a decent game against scrubs, He is absolutely garbage.

lmao at how mad you are
Splitter in his worst game of his career actually contributed in other ways
including 11 rebounds in 22 minutes
and assisting ginobili on his only baskets
being the catalyst for the huge lead at the start til Ginobili came and erased all his work
Splitter should probably file for a sexual harassment lawsuit after this game tbh with how much contact they were allowing on him
ginobili is just trash shooting stepback 3s and tripping over himself

Splitter actually has the harder defensive assignment as well at guarding the perimeter bigs instead of getting to stand near the basket and pad his blocks
Ginobili just gambles and fails at everything at this point on the defensive end now

[ElNono]

so under your criteria, the NBA as of right now is composed of no more than 5 stars and the rest are non-stars correct?

funny so wade is not a star either cause he would not lead a team to a win rate similar to the thunder apparently :lol

Nah... I think the NBA is composed of a some stars, some former stars, some all-stars, some role players, some rooks, some scrubs and so on...

I'm glad you asked, btw...

As I said, I meant no slight to Tony when I said he wasn't a franchise-caliber player (or 'star' under my criteria). He's still up there with the most talented players in the league.

I'm fine with different people having different definitions of 'star'. This isn't the first or last time it's been discussed.

[freetiago]

Splitters had multiple games this year wheres hes scored 20+ points on super efficiency and was the catalyst in the comebacks
such as the Bucks Celtics and Knicks game
and its funny how defensive the manusuckers get when i drop truth bombs
they deflect the question and attack splitter
im not a splitter homer despite the username
but everyone who watches the spurs should know that Splitter is more important to the Spurs this year then Manu
it wasnt until Ginobili missed half the season last year that SA really went on a roll

[hater]

Nah... I think the NBA is composed of a some stars, some former stars, some all-stars, some role players, some rooks, some scrubs and so on...

I'm glad you asked, btw...

As I said, I meant no slight to Tony when I said he wasn't a franchise-caliber player (or 'star' under my criteria). He's still up there with the most talented players in the league.

I'm fine with different people having different definitions of 'star'. This isn't the first or last time it's been discussed.

right so again, by your definition, there are abour a handful of stars in the NBA. and Wade, Kobe, Westbrook, Parker are not.

just making sure.

by my definition, the team's mvp and best player is a star. especially in a team at the top of the NBA recordwise. most analyst and fans go with my definition btw

[HarlemHeat37]

They don't need Ginobili to be a star anymore, hopefully Pop and even Manu himself realize this in the playoffs..

Manu can be a high-end role player, at this point, which is fine..every team needs championship-level, proven guys to play key roles, and Manu can certainly provide that..he cannot consistently fit the role of creator, but he's still a great spot-up shooter, he's still a good passer and he can still draw charges/bring intangibles..

The Spurs have simply reached a point where they cannot stubbornly rely on Ginobili for star power, and they cannot depend on him to run the offense on every play..the beauty of Ginobili's skill-set is that he's a very good off-ball player, which could still allow him to thrive in the system..

Pop needs to realize that it's time for a shift in roles..Leonard's confidence is high, he's young, it's time that he moves up in the hierarchy, while allowing Ginobili to potentially succeed in a reduced role..

[ElNono]

right so again, by your definition, there are abour a handful of stars in the NBA. and Wade, Kobe, Westbrook, Parker are not.


Well, it depends on how you define 'star'... To me, Duncan, Durant, Kobe, Lebron, Shaq, Robinson... those are stars... franchise caliber players, IMO.

You really suck at reading :lol

I think Miami built around Wade in 2006 and he delivered. Same applies to Dirk. So they would both fit my franchise-caliber criteria.


by my definition, the team's mvp and best player is a star. especially in a team at the top of the NBA recordwise. most analyst and fans go with my definition btw

As I said, I have no problem how everyone else decides to define 'star'.

[ElNono]

They don't need Ginobili to be a star anymore, hopefully Pop and even Manu himself realize this in the playoffs..

Manu can be a high-end role player, at this point, which is fine..every team needs championship-level, proven guys to play key roles, and Manu can certainly provide that..he cannot consistently fit the role of creator, but he's still a great spot-up shooter, he's still a good passer and he can still draw charges/bring intangibles..

The Spurs have simply reached a point where they cannot stubbornly rely on Ginobili for star power, and they cannot depend on him to run the offense on every play..the beauty of Ginobili's skill-set is that he's a very good off-ball player, which could still allow him to thrive in the system..

Pop needs to realize that it's time for a shift in roles..Leonard's confidence is high, he's young, it's time that he moves up in the hierarchy, while allowing Ginobili to potentially succeed in a reduced role..

With Kawhi starting I don't even think there's much overlap. At the end of games you'll still probably going to see TP/Manu/Kawhi/TD/Tiago... if Green has the hot hand from downtown, I wouldn't even be surprised if he fills in at SG.

[wtgspurs]

If you don't fail to realize that Manu ginobili is done at this point and time WHEN THE SEASON IS NEAR ITS END then you're completely Bonkers! He's still a good player and has some gas left in him but he needs to know his role by now. We have been complaining about him from ever since the season start. I don't know if it's his injury's plaguing him but it's sad to watch what his career has came to at this point. I won't lie...the last 3 of the last 4 games we lost i could solidly blame them on Ginobili. We cannot enter the playoffs with Manu playing the way he is now...we won't win. He lacks confidence and seems to be limited physically, I love manu...but like Flav Flav said in his show...Your time is up. The spurs should go to Kawhi, Danny Green, Tony Parker and Tim Duncan (Playing Solid) if they wanna have some chance at the playoffs. At this point as i see it the spurs offense should look like this (1) Tony Parker (2) Kawhi (3) Duncan (4) Green (5) Splitter (6) Neal (7) Ginobili and the rest is just other players contributing a little touch here and there.
Now the breakdown of my analysis.

Tony Parker - Is great at driving to the hoop. He's extremely fast. Good at drawing Fouls. Gets more And 1's than all players on the team. Great Passer. Simply the best offensive player the spurs have. Once he isn't turning over the ball, TP is a complete BEAST!

Kawhi Leonard - The reason i put him ahead of Duncan is because he's much younger and seems to have more consistency in his game. He's a great hustler. Can drive to the Basket. Creates his own shot. Has a better FG% than most players on the team. His strength to get to the hoop and ability to force players in to turnovers is phenomenal. If we lose him, we lose a chance at championship this year.

Tim Duncan- Just be yourself...be Tim Duncan. Do what Duncan do.

Danny Green - Once he is on the court with the starting lineup, his ability to hit the 3 ball increase significantly. He seems a lot more confident with these guys on the court. The Spurs are gonna need him to be draining that good stuff in the playoffs.

Tiago - Just do what Tiago is supposed to do, and make sure it goes in. Play strong defense, you're 7ft tall.

Gary Neal - I wont lie, when he gets hot, he hits shots! eg. Houston game, and Cleveland game...Gary Neal is a good player once he has strong defenders on the court with him.

To conclude...we can't be playing lazy at any given night. Never show your opponents your weakness. Spurs have a problem of being exposed easily...THE SYSTEM!!!

[TheyCallMePro]

I was more disappointed with Pop tonight than Ginobli. We were rolling, up 12, with the starting five we had out there. Then Pop took all of them out...put in blair, neal, diaw, etc, and we immediately struggled, lost the lead, and got routed. By the time we put all the starters back in together it was too late. But yea, Ginobli has turned over into a turnover machine. For some reason the ball regularly is in his hands while bringing the ball up the court. Sometimes he even acts like a point guard. He's not. And neither is Gary Neal. Tony Parker and Cory Joseph are the only TRUE point guards on this team that can be trusted to not turn the ball over. Ginobli and Neal really need to be sat down and explained the situation. They're great players, and we need them on offense, but PLEASE, for the love of GOD, don't try to bring the ball up the floor. TP and CJ are more than capable of doing that.

[SpurPadre]

"We've got to get things together and go back to who we were," said Manu Ginobili (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/272/manu-ginobili), who had seven points on 2-for-10 shooting. "Because it's happening too often now."

Well, that's all well and good Manu but you should say that about yourself more than the team, tbh. Look at yourself in the mirror and bring back the REAL Manu, goddammit.

[Brazil]

Issue we have as fans is expectations, people get mad at tp to not being able to carry a team to a championship so far, what the fuck is that ? You expect what ? Tp being wade 2006, Lebron 2012, dirk 2011 ?? Stupid. Now people get mad at Manu for being old ? Stupid. Regarding Manu everybody just need to accept 2005 Manu was in 2005. Fans need to adjust expectations when analyzing players. This is also the same process the player needs to go through, some players do it quick: miller, Kidd... Other never do it.

now this is something we can bitch about, time for pop and Manu to understand that and adjust.
In TP's case, he needs to deal with what bother him like sefo, becoming a spot up shooter won't help the spurs, they don't have the talent to overcome tp being erased from the equation.

as mentioned the spurs success depend on a team effort led by tp and hopefully Tim anchoring the D, in that conditions success is much more difficult to get than having Lebron or Durant capable to compensate a bad production of the role players.

[EricB]

And you think he's not been horrible all season. He's finished and is more of a liability than an asset. Sorry to break it to you.

Hes finished?


youre the fucking loon.

[ElNono]

Issue we have as fans is expectations, people get mad at tp to not being able to carry a team to a championship so far, what the fuck is that ? You expect what ? Tp being wade 2006, Lebron 2012, dirk 2011 ?? Stupid. Now people get mad at Manu for being old ? Stupid. Regarding Manu everybody just need to accept 2005 Manu was in 2005. Fans need to adjust expectations when analyzing players. This is also the same process the player needs to go through, some players do it quick: miller, Kidd... Other never do it.

now this is something we can bitch about, time for pop and Manu to understand that and adjust.
In TP's case, he needs to deal with what bother him like sefo, becoming a spot up shooter won't help the spurs, they don't have the talent to overcome tp being erased from the equation.

as mentioned the spurs success depend on a team effort led by tp and hopefully Tim anchoring the D, in that conditions success is much more difficult to get than having Lebron or Durant capable to compensate a bad production of the role players.

Exactly. When Tim was SNES-era videogame Tim, everything was a lot easier. I mean, we're still winning at the same pace in the regular season, but come playoff time, the burden will be a lot greater on even the smaller pieces. And this team will need all hands on deck to make up for the fact that we don't have the Lebrons or the Durants.

[hater]

You really suck at reading :lol

I think Miami built around Wade in 2006 and he delivered. Same applies to Dirk. So they would both fit my franchise-caliber criteria.



As I said, I have no problem how everyone else decides to define 'star'.

I meant this years kobe. Unless u think thus years kobe us more of a star than parker?

No problem with your criteria either although it must be higlighted that ur criteria is not the criteria shared by the rest of the world

[ElNono]

I meant this years kobe. Unless u think thus years kobe us more of a star than parker?

Not sure what you're calling a star there. A franchise player is a franchise player regardless of their production at any given season. Dirk is a franchise caliber player despite Dallas poor season. Tim is a franchise caliber player despite his obvious decline. They're players that at their peak had or have teams built around them and are/were pretty much unstoppable. Obviously, basketball is a team game and not all of them rang, but they're the clearly a cut above the rest.


No problem with your criteria either although it must be higlighted that ur criteria is not the criteria shared by the rest of the world

Says who? You? :lol

[hater]

Not sure what you're calling a star there. A franchise player is a franchise player regardless of their production at any given season. Dirk is a franchise caliber player despite Dallas poor season. Tim is a franchise caliber player despite his obvious decline. They're players that at their peak had or have teams built around them and are/were pretty much unstoppable. Obviously, basketball is a team game and not all of them rang, but they're the clearly a cut above the rest.



Says who? You? :lol

:lmao u really believe your criteria for star is what mainstream uses? U need help :lol

[ElNono]

:lmao u really believe your criteria for star is what mainstream uses? U need help :lol

:lol you think you know anything about basketball in general

:lol can't even predict 1 game right out of 4 games in a row

[Proxy]

Parker is a star and it should be acknowledged that he's played as well as anyone this year, but it's the system that carries the team and beating OKC without him supports that. Obviously can't win it all without him, but you can apply that reference of importance to any of the main cast of the team. It's not a knock on him... just how this team is.

[superjames1992]

Why don't we wait until we see how Manu performs in the Playoffs before we determine that he's "done," tbh?

[hater]

Parker is a star and it should be acknowledged that he's played as well as anyone this year,

thank you :rolleyes

[TrainOfThought5]

im not sure why everyone is so dismayed after a loss in which our three best players didnt play, on a B2B, on the road.

additionally, Manu is not in his prime and is unable to carry the team. and frankly, i feel like if defenses key in on him as a #1 option (like tonight) then he does become a liability. i love Manu. i believe he can still be effective. just not as a primary load bearer at his advanced age, with his ridiculously high amount of miles on him. and theres nothing wrong with that. Kawhi is waiting in the wings to write his own chapter of Spurs folklore.

[urunobili]

lol hater
You're due to get powned soon...

[jag]

That's your argument. AFAIK, Ben Gordon never been an All-Star, so he would be below Tony.

That was directed to the clown comparing Rip Hamilton's career to Tony's.

[jag]

Parker is a star and it should be acknowledged that he's played as well as anyone this year, but it's the system that carries the team and beating OKC without him supports that. Obviously can't win it all without him, but you can apply that reference of importance to any of the main cast of the team. It's not a knock on him... just how this team is.

Winning one game (or losing one game) with or without Tony supports neither side of the argument. It's not about one game.

The system isn't made for Tim, Tony or Manu. The system is designed to get the most out of support players. The system allows players like Green, Neal, Kawhi, Diaw and Splitter to focus on very specific roles within the offense. It's like workers on an assembly line. Players with the requisite talent, as well as unselfish stars, can be plugged into the system and the machine keeps rolling with the players being more or less interchangeable. But the thing that separates Tony from the rest of the team is that he can consistently distribute, score and create his own offense independent of the system. When the system breaks down, Tony is able to take over. Without the system is Tony capable of carrying the team all the way to a title? On his own, I don't think so. But even a prime Kobe Bryant, on his own, was just lucky to get the Lakers to the playoffs. In 04-05, without Shaq and the Triangle, the Lakers didn't make the playoffs. In 05-06, with Phil's great system, Kobe couldn't get the Lakers out of the first round. Is Bryant, one of the top 2 players of the past 10 years, not a "star" either?

No, Tony isn't on the same level as Bryant. And no, Tony doesn't have the same garbage players around him that Bryant had. But you're fooling yourself if you don't think that this Spurs team - without Tim and Manu - would be a perennial playoff team with Tony leading the way. Don't confuse Tony's unselfishness, and willingness to play within the system, for the fact that he could go for 30 points a night if he wanted to. As talented and as much of a star as Chris Paul is, I think Tony has done more with his ability than Paul has, especially within the confines of Pop's system. Looking at his consistent production and career achievements, I think that makes him just as much of a star.

[ThaBigFundamental21]

We lost because of Pop's arrogance TBH. Really, sitting 2 of your best 4 players??? With Parker being legitimately hurt. What a joke, he thinks we can beat anyone no matter who is on the court. This is the fuckin NBA pop. I'm not too happy with his choice.

[Brazil]

im not sure why everyone is so dismayed after a loss in which our three best players didnt play, on a B2B, on the road.
.

because we lost to a team without 4 or 5 of their best players. On paper Spurs should have won this game even without tp, tim and kl. now shit happens.

[Brazil]

Winning one game (or losing one game) with or without Tony supports neither side of the argument. It's not about one game.

The system isn't made for Tim, Tony or Manu. The system is designed to get the most out of support players. The system allows players like Green, Neal, Kawhi, Diaw and Splitter to focus on very specific roles within the offense. It's like workers on an assembly line. Players with the requisite talent, as well as unselfish stars, can be plugged into the system and the machine keeps rolling with the players being more or less interchangeable. But the thing that separates Tony from the rest of the team is that he can consistently distribute, score and create his own offense independent of the system. When the system breaks down, Tony is able to take over. Without the system is Tony capable of carrying the team all the way to a title? On his own, I don't think so. But even a prime Kobe Bryant, on his own, was just lucky to get the Lakers to the playoffs. In 04-05, without Shaq and the Triangle, the Lakers didn't make the playoffs. In 05-06, with Phil's great system, Kobe couldn't get the Lakers out of the first round. Is Bryant, one of the top 2 players of the past 10 years, not a "star" either?

No, Tony isn't on the same level as Bryant. And no, Tony doesn't have the same garbage players around him that Bryant had. But you're fooling yourself if you don't think that this Spurs team - without Tim and Manu - would be a perennial playoff team with Tony leading the way. Don't confuse Tony's unselfishness, and willingness to play within the system, for the fact that he could go for 30 points a night if he wanted to. As talented and as much of a star as Chris Paul is, I think Tony has done more with his ability than Paul has, especially within the confines of Pop's system. Looking at his consistent production and career achievements, I think that makes him just as much of a star.

my thought exactly except regarding the system, clearly the system is also settled to exploit mainly Tim, Manu and Tony quality. Fact is the system for the second unit needs to be rethought because Manu is no more capable of doing what he was doing 3 years ago consistently. The Manu plays PG, SG with the second unit and the give the ball to Manu in the fourth and gfto his way times are over.

[pgardn]

Yes, youre right.

Rip Hamilton's career = Tony's career

There have only been 20 star players in NBA history. I hope The Admiral makes the list.


I am throwing out examples with question marks to define a star, to which you have no definition. Star on A team, star in the league. You have some hidden definition which you cannot give criteria for.

And apparently a star must be playing at a high level right now. Stars from the past don't exist. Give a GD definition with criteria, not your flippant musings.

And quit acting like some acne ridden homer child. Ssince you are so sure of your hidden system, who is the bigger star, Chauncey Billups or Tony Parker? How would you rate their careers right now? Explain please.

[kaji157]

This thread will end as the "Will Ginobili ever score 20 again thread?"

As a fun memory of how bipolar some fans are.

[rjv]

in order, the team is led by 1) tony 2) tim 3) kawhi and then 4) manu...that's not a bad thing but the reality is that manu is now the 4th best player on the team

[ElNono]

That was directed to the clown comparing Rip Hamilton's career to Tony's.

oh, ok

[cd98]

A couple of thoughts:

The system didn't make Parker great. He was an all-star and an NBA finals MVP before the current system was put in place. And if it was the system, then one of the other back up point guards could step right in and equal Parker, but that hasn't happened. Parker is a stud and we are lucky to have him.

Ginoboli was a star player. He was our finisher. For a number of years, including championship years, the ball was in his hands at the end of games because he was a great free throw shooter, creator, and clutch scorer. He was one of the NBA's best shooting guards. But he has declined noticably and too often takes bad shots that he could make a few years ago, but now he can't. He is also a magnificent passer, but his decision-making can be questionable. I think he needs to get some confidence back. If he can get his three point stroke back (something that older players can do), then he can still be very effective. He just needs to play within himself.

Our bench is better with Ginoboli. He doesn't have to be a star, but he has to be solid for us to win a title.

[pgardn]

wtf did I just read?
Is he?
over their careers you dumb ass?

[pgardn]

Yes, youre right.

Rip Hamilton's career = Tony's career

There have only been 20 star players in NBA history. I hope The Admiral makes the list.

Why do you think I even picked Hamilton, ya cycloptic homer? And quit adding stuff, I never stated they were equal. Answer the Billups question and back it up oh great chooser of "the stars"?

[Obstructed_View]

I agree. Put him in the fucking starting lineup.

[jag]

I am throwing out examples with question marks to define a star, to which you have no definition. Star on A team, star in the league. You have some hidden definition which you cannot give criteria for.

And apparently a star must be playing at a high level right now. Stars from the past don't exist. Give a GD definition with criteria, not your flippant musings.

And quit acting like some acne ridden homer child. Ssince you are so sure of your hidden system, who is the bigger star, Chauncey Billups or Tony Parker? How would you rate their careers right now? Explain please.


Why do you think I even picked Hamilton, ya cycloptic homer? And quit adding stuff, I never stated they were equal. Answer the Billups question and back it up oh great chooser of "the stars"?

Why you mad tho? My hidden “system” to determine which players are stars? lol

I haven’t really defined an arbitrary set of parameters to objectively determine which NBA players are, or are not, “stars.”

As far as a comparison between Billups and Parker, it’s difficult to compare their respective careers overall. Counting this season, Billups has played 16 seasons and Parker has played 12. Billups spent his first 6 seasons with 5 different teams. During that time he missed 121 games due to injury. Tony is a very different story.

If you want to compare the two, you’ll have to choose a set of years for each player that can be considered their “prime” years. I think this is really the only way it’s fair for Billups. For Tony, I picked ’03-’04 through the current season ’12-’13. For Chauncey, I just picked the years when he started playing significant minutes (after his injuries) to a time just a couple years ago when he started to noticeably drop off -- ‘01-’02 through ’10-’11.

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/1034/parkbill.jpg

The numbers are fairly similar during their “prime” years. Tony scored more points, but he also shot the ball more. Billups shot a much lower FG%, but he also made more 3-pointers so that bumped up his PPG average. Tony has slightly more assists, but he also has slightly more turnovers. Overall, I tried to balance the stats out as much as possible so the two were on a level playing field. It doesn’t look like much, but Billups’ MPG being higher than Tony’s resulted in Tony being favored in virtually all categories once you start comparing Per 36 Min stats. And if you really want to compare “careers” and not just their best years, you can toss in the first 4 years of Chauncey’s career where in 215 games he averaged 27 MPG, 10.9 PPG, shot 39% from the field and had 3.7 Assists per game. You end up with one guy (Parker) who has shot 50% for his career, and another guy (Billups) who has shot closer to 40% for his career.

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/8756/parkbill2.jpg

If we’re going to compare careers, in 16 years Billups hasn’t put together a better career than Tony has during his 12 years. You can compare the stats or you can compare career accomplishments. Both players are 5x NBA All-Stars. Both players have won NBA Finals MVP. Billups has 1 ring - Tony has 3. You could compare the players defensively, but I’ve always thought Billups was an overrated defender, while Tony’s defense has always been underrated. Whatever your opinion, I’m not sure how you could prove or disprove either point.

If nothing else, Tony has been a dependable model of consistency throughout his career. Tony started contributing immediately as a 19 year old straight from France. It wasn’t until Billups was 25 years old that he showed enough ability for a team to want to hold on to him. Parker didn’t have a 5 year span being a chucker bouncing from team to team. And Parker has never been a player who will straight up shoot you out of playoff games. During his “prime” it wasn’t all that surprising to see Billups go full JR Smith with his chucking. Parker still has a lot left in his tank, and if he continues his great play for another 3-4 years, I don’t see how they’ll be any comparison between the two, especially when you take into account each player’s entire body of work, including rings.




Is Parker more of a star than Chauncey Billups to all who have watched the NBA for 15 years?

Yeah, I’d say so. And considering how much he’s bounced around the League, I think a few GM’s agree.

[ace3g]

New Pope is from Buenos Aires, Argentina; Manu will dominate the rest of the season

[ElNono]

New Pope is from Buenos Aires, Argentina; Manu will dominate the rest of the season

Let us pray

[hater]

not sold on starting him. Yes, we'll be able to hide his shitbagness in the starting lineup next to TD and Parker, but at what cost? Danny Green will turn to complete shit.

but it might be worth it. Manu's confidence is shot to hell right now. At least with some confidence back he might at least stop being a liability.

[hater]

lol hater
You're due to get powned soon...

I'll gladly take an ownage by Manu in the WCF. but there's practically zero chance of that happening.

[tim_duncan_fan]

Nono is right about there being very few stars. Counting aging world-beaters like Tim, and being easy about the definition, there's probably 12 in the league now.

Tim
Kobe (Dot Howard isn't a star)
Durant
Lebron
Wade (Bosh isn't a star)
Dirk
Rose (maybe)
Harden
Chris Paul
Blake Griffin

Steph Curry will step into this group and Kyrie Irving doesn't get in because he plays for the Cavaliers, but his talent is evident an undeniable.

To me, a star is a player that has a lasting, playoff-positive effect on his team on a year to year basis. An entire organization revolves around a star. If a player is a star, removing said player from his team devastates the present and future of the entire organization. You remove a star and the entire organization collapses, because a star naturally has an organization built around him or based on him. Yes, we would probably miss the playoffs without Parker, but the entire Spurs situation not-so-secretly revolves around the hope of Tim Duncan attaining some semblance of playoff 2003 dominance.

Guys like Parker, Bosh, Al Horford, Garnett, Josh Smith, maybe Rose, Melo Anthony and youthful Manu Ginobili are very good players that may have at some point in time been considered as a franchise cornerstone, but are not in fact one of the greats. They are all-stars, but they really don't affect the shape of the league the way true stars do. They get "nice" numbers and are nice players, but picking them as "the guy" won't net you championships or a cemented, decade-long place in the conversation about championships. You can't rest your franchise on their shoulders or you will fail and/or they will leave to be a second or third option for a true star.

Like it or not, you can "feel" that there is a difference between a 2003 Duncan and a 2012 Parker. They simply aren't the same caliber of player.

Parker may be a better ball player than Blake Griffin is, but Griffin is an athletic 6'10 with a 50" vertical.

Nash was a star because he held the Suns organization on his shoulders. They may not have won a championship, but that team was all Nash. Nash was a force that you could not ignore in his position as "centerpiece." Parker, and Ginobili were never that and likely could not have been that. Money, the prospect of being "the one" and human nature lead to Harden becoming a centerpiece because he could be that. If you're not a star, a centerpiece, it's because you aren't and you can't and you couldn't.

[ElNono]

^ There's admittedly some that are difficult to classify... cases like KG or Pierce. They had franchises built around them, and it didn't quite work out, but I don't know that necessarily means they didn't have the talent.

[spurraider21]

Garnett undoubtedly WAS a star. Pierce is weird because the Celtics had those dead seasons before KG arrived. But pierce was clearly carrying the early 2000's celtics into the playoffs back when they had black hole antoine walker. I'd still call pierce a star as he's clearly the best on that team. I'd easily add Rose and Melo into that list. Nash also fits into the "former" stars category.

[tim_duncan_fan]

I feel like Melo's teams are always going to fall short and never really make a deep playoff run. There's a story every year that suggests Melo lacks essential leadership qualities. He's the Randy Moss of basketball.

[Pop]

Lol at Manu fans coming up with shit takes to diffuse the pathetic performance of Manu.

TP is the best PG in the league and has been for the last year and a half, he's a star, he led his team in the playoffs where the overrated bench/system let him down, that's what happened last year but somehow the system is the star and Pop is the genius on spurstalk yada yada.

[Proxy]

Winning one game (or losing one game) with or without Tony supports neither side of the argument. It's not about one game.

The system isn't made for Tim, Tony or Manu. The system is designed to get the most out of support players. The system allows players like Green, Neal, Kawhi, Diaw and Splitter to focus on very specific roles within the offense. It's like workers on an assembly line. Players with the requisite talent, as well as unselfish stars, can be plugged into the system and the machine keeps rolling with the players being more or less interchangeable. But the thing that separates Tony from the rest of the team is that he can consistently distribute, score and create his own offense independent of the system. When the system breaks down, Tony is able to take over. Without the system is Tony capable of carrying the team all the way to a title? On his own, I don't think so. But even a prime Kobe Bryant, on his own, was just lucky to get the Lakers to the playoffs. In 04-05, without Shaq and the Triangle, the Lakers didn't make the playoffs. In 05-06, with Phil's great system, Kobe couldn't get the Lakers out of the first round. Is Bryant, one of the top 2 players of the past 10 years, not a "star" either?

No, Tony isn't on the same level as Bryant. And no, Tony doesn't have the same garbage players around him that Bryant had. But you're fooling yourself if you don't think that this Spurs team - without Tim and Manu - would be a perennial playoff team with Tony leading the way. Don't confuse Tony's unselfishness, and willingness to play within the system, for the fact that he could go for 30 points a night if he wanted to. As talented and as much of a star as Chris Paul is, I think Tony has done more with his ability than Paul has, especially within the confines of Pop's system. Looking at his consistent production and career achievements, I think that makes him just as much of a star.

Agree with everything. The point I was trying to make is that we don't have a chance to get to the finals without Tony. He yields the highest percentage of responsibility in terms of the team's success due of his incredible play, and consistency as you stated. Denying that would be moronic. That being said, I think good cases could be made that the absence of any of the Spurs' top 5-6 players on the depth chart would pretty much leave some glaring hole to be exploited by any of the elite teams come playoff time. Because of that and the team winning through injuries, I was thinking that none of the players necessarily transcend the system while acknowledging Parker plays the most important role. I was pointing that out because nono and hater seemed to be arguing black and white to something very grey.

[ElNono]

Agree with everything. The point I was trying to make is that we don't have a chance to get to the finals without Tony. He yields the highest percentage of responsibility in terms of the team's success due of his incredible play, and consistency as you stated. Denying that would be moronic. That being said, I think good cases could be made that the absence of any of the Spurs' top 5-6 players on the depth chart would pretty much leave some glaring hole to be exploited by any of the elite teams come playoff time. Because of that and the team winning through injuries, I was thinking that none of the players necessarily transcend the system while acknowledging Parker plays the most important role. I was pointing that out because nono and hater seemed to be arguing black and white to something very grey.

There's no black and white, right or wrong. It's all opinion. That's why I stated I have no problem with how somebody else defines 'star', or obviously, how you rank them.

[Proxy]

There's no black and white, right or wrong. It's all opinion. That's why I stated I have no problem with how somebody else defines 'star', or obviously, how you rank them.

This team rises and falls with Duncan. (which contradicts any points I made)

[pgardn]

Why you mad tho? My hidden “system” to determine which players are stars? lol

I haven’t really defined an arbitrary set of parameters to objectively determine which NBA players are, or are not, “stars.”

As far as a comparison between Billups and Parker, it’s difficult to compare their respective careers overall. Counting this season, Billups has played 16 seasons and Parker has played 12. Billups spent his first 6 seasons with 5 different teams. During that time he missed 121 games due to injury. Tony is a very different story.

If you want to compare the two, you’ll have to choose a set of years for each player that can be considered their “prime” years. I think this is really the only way it’s fair for Billups. For Tony, I picked ’03-’04 through the current season ’12-’13. For Chauncey, I just picked the years when he started playing significant minutes (after his injuries) to a time just a couple years ago when he started to noticeably drop off -- ‘01-’02 through ’10-’11.

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/1034/parkbill.jpg

The numbers are fairly similar during their “prime” years. Tony scored more points, but he also shot the ball more. Billups shot a much lower FG%, but he also made more 3-pointers so that bumped up his PPG average. Tony has slightly more assists, but he also has slightly more turnovers. Overall, I tried to balance the stats out as much as possible so the two were on a level playing field. It doesn’t look like much, but Billups’ MPG being higher than Tony’s resulted in Tony being favored in virtually all categories once you start comparing Per 36 Min stats. And if you really want to compare “careers” and not just their best years, you can toss in the first 4 years of Chauncey’s career where in 215 games he averaged 27 MPG, 10.9 PPG, shot 39% from the field and had 3.7 Assists per game. You end up with one guy (Parker) who has shot 50% for his career, and another guy (Billups) who has shot closer to 40% for his career.

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/8756/parkbill2.jpg

If we’re going to compare careers, in 16 years Billups hasn’t put together a better career than Tony has during his 12 years. You can compare the stats or you can compare career accomplishments. Both players are 5x NBA All-Stars. Both players have won NBA Finals MVP. Billups has 1 ring - Tony has 3. You could compare the players defensively, but I’ve always thought Billups was an overrated defender, while Tony’s defense has always been underrated. Whatever your opinion, I’m not sure how you could prove or disprove either point.

If nothing else, Tony has been a dependable model of consistency throughout his career. Tony started contributing immediately as a 19 year old straight from France. It wasn’t until Billups was 25 years old that he showed enough ability for a team to want to hold on to him. Parker didn’t have a 5 year span being a chucker bouncing from team to team. And Parker has never been a player who will straight up shoot you out of playoff games. During his “prime” it wasn’t all that surprising to see Billups go full JR Smith with his chucking. Parker still has a lot left in his tank, and if he continues his great play for another 3-4 years, I don’t see how they’ll be any comparison between the two, especially when you take into account each player’s entire body of work, including rings.



Yeah, I’d say so. And considering how much he’s bounced around the League, I think a few GM’s agree.

I would say Billups led less talented teams to championships. Got more out of his team as a leader. I would say Billups had a much better all around game. Note: without stats and without a clean definition... Yet salient and in no way diff. than how other NBA execs., besides yourself, might answer.

Especially since Billups is NOW old, and IF I were a Detroit fan.

If no-no says Parker is not a star, and then states only Duncan has been out of the big 3, I took that to mean Franchise "stars". The superlative was set for me. Then we started going NBA broadcast with the superlatives, and I had no idea what a star is or was. IS, obviously gave a player more points, which is why I used Billups.

[hater]

Lol at Manu fans coming up with shit takes to diffuse the pathetic performance of Manu.

TP is the best PG in the league and has been for the last year and a half, he's a star, he led his team in the playoffs where the overrated bench/system let him down, that's what happened last year but somehow the system is the star and Pop is the genius on spurstalk yada yada.

agree. while there's room for "my opinion, my rules" kind of takes. There's the mainstream thinking and majority perception and in the real world, 9 out of 10 basketball knowledgeable people will agree that Parker is a star. And is the star player of the San Antonio Spurs.

of course there's doubters and denyers. they live in the fringes of logic and just exist.

[pgardn]

Lol at Manu fans coming up with shit takes to diffuse the pathetic performance of Manu.

TP is the best PG in the league and has been for the last year and a half, he's a star, he led his team in the playoffs where the overrated bench/system let him down, that's what happened last year but somehow the system is the star and Pop is the genius on spurstalk yada yada.

You gotta be kidding. Let him down... the bench definitely, the plays... meh.

We got beat by a younger team playing better basketball in the W. Finals. Nothing wrong with that.

Chris Paul is the best PG. I admire Tony and his grit (besides the fact he said we did not have a chance last year.) If he could hit 3's comfortably I would rate Tony the best. The fact that the 3 is not really in the arsenal puts him at a severe disadvantage during the playoffs.

[ElNono]

agree. while there's room for "my opinion, my rules" kind of takes. There's the mainstream thinking and majority perception and in the real world, 9 out of 10 basketball knowledgeable people will agree that Parker is a star. And is the star player of the San Antonio Spurs.

of course there's doubters and denyers. they live in the fringes of logic and just exist.

:lol self-appointing yourself as the arbiter of "mainstream thinking and majority perception"

Every time you went with a semi-'gutsy' call since Tony went down you've been nothing but wrong. You're basically shooting worse than Manu in the last 3 games, tbh.

What you need to do is stick with the vanilla, low risk-high reward takes like "Miami is going to win it all". Good odds, and the average basketball reader here will think you at least watch the games.

[Bruno]

:rollin @ this thread.

So, with the "Ginobili is awesome" thesis not being able to be seriously defended given his performances, Manu's homers are now in "but Parker is not great too" mode.

It has been like that for years. When Ginobili can't be pimped because he sucks, let's trash Parker because, you know, Ginobili>Parker.

[ElNono]

:rollin @ this thread.

So, with the "Ginobili is awesome" thesis not being able to be seriously defended given his performances, Manu's homers are now in "but Parker is not great too" mode.

It has been like that for years. When Ginobili can't be pimped because he sucks, let's trash Parker.

I called Tony amongst the top talent in the league, so I gather you're referring to somebody else?

[Bruno]

I called Tony amongst the top talent in the league, so I gather you're referring to somebody else?

You're one of these "Manu's homers".

[ElNono]

You're one of these "Manu's homers".

So what you're saying is that I'm wrong and Tony isn't amongst the top talent in the league? I disagree, but that's your opinion...

If not, state your disagreement.

[DAF86]

The fact that Manu is now old and broken doesn't take away the fact that Manu > Tony as a basketball player and human being, tbh.

[freetiago]

I called Tony amongst the top talent in the league, so I gather you're referring to somebody else?


the fact that this thread has absolutely nothing to do about Parker yet Manusuckers bring him up
its about Ginobilis inability to lead a bench unit
Manusuckers have also trashed Tiago for no reason in this thread

[ElNono]

the fact that this thread has absolutely nothing to do about Parker yet Manusuckers bring him up
its about Ginobilis inability to lead a bench unit
Manusuckers have also trashed Tiago for no reason in this thread

Well, *I* certainly didn't bring him up... as far as I can tell, he was brought up in this post:

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=210774&p=6415548&viewfull=1#post6415548