Peak Manu>Peak Parker, IMO.

[apalisoc_9]

In the RS parker is so much better but let us be real here.

- Ginobili reads the situation better
- Passes when he needs to pass
- scores when he needs to score
- Tony would rather lose than lose the MVP to kawhi leonard or tim duncan. Check Manu 2005.
- manu would would have never gone 6/24 because he would have passed the ball to Kawhi or Timmy.
- Tony purposly tries to leave out leonard...Serious, can sense it tbh. Too scared Leonard might progress and threaten his top dog position..

I'm talking about peak not 8 turnovers manu of course.

[hooperflash]

I thought this was gonna be a shoe thread...

[DAF86]

This troll is unpredictable, tbh.

[Arcadian]

Hm, that's actually a tough one. However, I would give the slight edge to Prime Parker. He has been the best at his position at various times during his career, and he was an MVP candidate once or twice. Also, let's not overlook that he has been the leader of the post-prime-Duncan Spurs. We haven't won a title with him as #1, but we've come damn close, as we all know.

[SpursFan86]

I'm honestly leaning toward Manu just because he was an amazing playoff performer at his peak.

[TheGoldStandard]

Peak Parker just because the alternative at point guard would be pretty shitty

[Mikeanaro]

Peak Manu of course.

[Blue Duck]

Great debate fodder, i love TP, please don't get me wrong..... but peak Manu gave you points, assists, blocks, steals, drew charges, had consistent 3pt range ( not just wide open looks from the corner) and could dunk with ferocity...
even over bugs including Shaq. Plus, he made everyone else better, sorry Manuhatewagoneers...... there's no contest here.

[TheGoldStandard]

But who'd you have running the offense? Peak Manu didn't play crazy minutes and was still off the bench.

[Sean Cagney]

I'm honestly leaning toward Manu just because he was an amazing playoff performer at his peak.

He was a beast.

[PlayNando]

Yes, Peak Manu > Peak Tony, IMO, but they're both good, tbh.

[skulls138]

Peak Manu could be better than Jordan on some days.

[Clipper Nation]

Peak Manu could be better than Jordan on some days.
:lmao

[baseline bum]

:lmao

I'd take all but Game 6 Manu over DeAndre tbh.

[DMC]

Peak Manu could be better than Jordan on some days.

lol

[aal04]

Just about any version of Manu is MVP worthy if you dont count his brainfarts.

Unfortunately Manu lives off a staple diet of chilli beans and burritos.

[Kidd K]

That's debatable, but Parker has been more consistent and far less injury prone. It's easy to forget those times when Parker dropped high 30's games or 40+ while still racking up assists and not turning it over, because he's always getting 20+ games.

When Manu has a great game it's a lot more rare. Even in the past he typically didn't crack 30 very often. Parker has many a time.

Still, I won't entirely disagree. When Manu was good, he was real good.

[spurraider21]

Parker has had back to back MVP caliber seasons, something Manu never really did. however, if we are strictly talking peaks, yeah i'd say Manu > Tony. Manu at his best was otherworldly

[racm]

Manu was the better peak player (2005) but the most admirable thing about Tony is that he gets better every year

[mudyez]

Manu=
http://www.samefacts.com/images/Karakorum_K2-Big_1.jpg

Tony=
http://img.fotocommunity.com/images/Southern-Africa/South-Africa/Blick-auf-den-Tafelberg-a23092263.jpg


...if you kow what I mean!?

[spurraider21]

you could also argue that 2010-2011 pre-injury manu was the best one we saw. that was the year it was 'his' team, sort of the weird transition time between Tim and Tony

[timmy2003]

It's an unfair comparision because we won championships (05, 07) when Manu was at his peak. But peak Parker > peak Manu imo.

[EVAY]

It's such a hard comparison because they are such different players. Manu came to the spurs as a fully formed and completed star (admittedly in Europe). He always resisted Pop trying to make him into a 'fit into the spurs' system player', because he knew what he could do and wasn't about to let Pop stop him.

Tony came to the spurs as a 19 year old and became the fully formed Parker as Pop's creation. He was formed to fit entirely into Pop's system, and then told to run that system.

Manu in his prime was always more FUN to watch than Parker in his prime because we didn't often see Spurs players playing successfully with such abandon. Parker has never been that exciting, imo, because his talents have been molded to the system.

I still prefer to watch Manu, but Tony has been the better 'Spur' overall, imo.

But man, Manu is such great, great fun to watch. I will miss him more than I will miss Tony.

[313]

It's such a hard comparison because they are such different players. Manu came to the spurs as a fully formed and completed star (admittedly in Europe). He always resisted Pop trying to make him into a 'fit into the spurs' system player', because he knew what he could do and wasn't about to let Pop stop him.

Tony came to the spurs as a 19 year old and became the fully formed Parker as Pop's creation. He was formed to fit entirely into Pop's system, and then told to run that system.

Manu in his prime was always more FUN to watch than Parker in his prime because we didn't often see Spurs players playing successfully with such abandon. Parker has never been that exciting, imo, because his talents have been molded to the system.

I still prefer to watch Manu, but Tony has been the better 'Spur' overall, imo.

But man, Manu is such great, great fun to watch. I will miss him more than I will miss Tony.Tony can be pretty exciting tbh
brb hitting a step back 3 on leBron
brb stealing the ball from LeBron the next possession
brb abusing Chalmers on the next possession

brb crazy buzzer beater in gm 1

and you really can't use the fact that Tony never lead us to a ring as a reason that Manu is better, because Manu had Prime Duncan

[tenbeersbold]

LMFAO,really Manu was like the appetizer who did a few pretty things but didn't have much substance

Parker is the ONLY reason the Spurs have been in contention the last 4-5 years

Manu can't hold that bag,never did and never will and cost us at least 2 'ships

Y'all are seriously delusional up in here,you don't know how lucky you are that Parker stayed in SA

[Kool Bob Love]

LMFAO,really Manu was like the appetizer who did a few pretty things but didn't have much substance

Parker is the ONLY reason the Spurs have been in contention the last 4-5 years

Manu can't hold that bag,never did and never will and cost us at least 2 'ships

Y'all are seriously delusional up in here,you don't know how lucky you are that Parker stayed in SA

Parker got bench in 2003 game 6 finals for Speedy MOTHER FUCKIN Claxton. Give me a break.

[Kool Bob Love]

LMFAO,really Manu was like the appetizer who did a few pretty things but didn't have much substance

Parker is the ONLY reason the Spurs have been in contention the last 4-5 years

Manu can't hold that bag,never did and never will and cost us at least 2 'ships

Y'all are seriously delusional up in here,you don't know how lucky you are that Parker stayed in SA

He also went 6-23 in game 6. Than put a 3-12 for game 7.

[Kool Bob Love]

LMFAO,really Manu was like the appetizer who did a few pretty things but didn't have much substance

Parker is the ONLY reason the Spurs have been in contention the last 4-5 years

Manu can't hold that bag,never did and never will and cost us at least 2 'ships

Y'all are seriously delusional up in here,you don't know how lucky you are that Parker stayed in SA

Spurs fans know the truth.

Duncan>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Manu>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Claxton>>>Parker.

You notice we havent won shit with Parker leading the way? Duncan did his part last year.

[CitizenDwayne]

LMFAO,really Manu was like the appetizer who did a few pretty things but didn't have much substance

Parker is the ONLY reason the Spurs have been in contention the last 4-5 years

Manu can't hold that bag,never did and never will and cost us at least 2 'ships

Y'all are seriously delusional up in here,you don't know how lucky you are that Parker stayed in SA

The appetizer that we wouldn't have won 2 championships without. Stupid argument.

[Mikeanaro]

He also went 6-23 in game 6. Than put a 3-12 for game 7.
I blame Manu for game 6 but you are right, Porker game 7 was a torture to me, he was so predictable every Miami big was laughing at him.

[r0drig0lac]

I think this is not even debatable ... as much as I like parker ... manu in his prime was just another level of player (to my eyes at least), including 2002 and 2004 Argentine basketball team, and that's coming from a Brazilian

[hater]

sure prime Manu > prime Parker. I agree with this assessment.

Unfortunately this Manu that we have is a shell of that Manu. The problem is that Ginobili in his own mind still thinks he's THAT Manu, the evidence is in game 6 of the NBA Finals. He thought he was 2005 dishing out assists and being a Finals MVP candidate when he actually assisted the Heat and Lebron to repeat and cost Timmy his 5th ring.

the icing on the cake was that he never admitted to shitting the bed and alluded to being "hurt" and playing "so-so" That is NOT prime Manu. Prime Manu used to own up.

Manu's stubborness to adjust his game was his undoing. Fortunately we have the Ferrari to carry Manu to a decent next couple of years and avoid Manu's end of career from being a total embarrassment.

[HarlemHeat37]

sure prime Manu > prime Parker. I agree with this assessment.

Unfortunately this Manu that we have is a shell of that Manu. The problem is that Ginobili in his own mind still thinks he's THAT Manu, the evidence is in game 6 of the NBA Finals. He thought he was 2005 dishing out assists and being a Finals MVP candidate when he actually assisted the Heat and Lebron to repeat and cost Timmy his 5th ring.

the icing on the cake was that he never admitted to shitting the bed and alluded to being "hurt" and playing "so-so" That is NOT prime Manu. Prime Manu used to own up.

Manu's stubborness to adjust his game was his undoing. Fortunately we have the Ferrari to carry Manu to a decent next couple of years and avoid Manu's end of career from being a total embarrassment.

I don't have a horse in this race, tbh, but did Parker apologize for his Finals performance?..serious question, I didn't follow much of the Spurs' off-season news..if not, maybe he should have, since he was absolutely horrendous in the Finals..

[hater]

I don't have a horse in this race, tbh, but did Parker apologize for his Finals performance?..serious question, I didn't follow much of the Spurs' off-season news..if not, maybe he should have, since he was absolutely horrendous in the Finals..

Parker won game 1 for us and put us up 5 with 28 seconds to go in game 6.

he basically took us home and Pop + Manu crashed the bus within feet of the destination :lol

[Skull-1]

That's debatable, but Parker has been more consistent and far less injury prone. It's easy to forget those times when Parker dropped high 30's games or 40+ while still racking up assists and not turning it over, because he's always getting 20+ games.

When Manu has a great game it's a lot more rare. Even in the past he typically didn't crack 30 very often. Parker has many a time.

Still, I won't entirely disagree. When Manu was good, he was real good.


Manu was definitely better. Tony had a tendency to disappear. However, Tony may not be at his peak yet so he COULD surpass peak Manu. Peak Manu was a beast. The Flying Spaghetti Monster. Did a lot of everything and was a pest all over the court.

[EVAY]

Spurs fans know the truth.

Duncan>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Manu>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Claxton>>>Parker.

You notice we havent won shit with Parker leading the way? Duncan did his part last year.

Wait, hold on...what about the championship where PARKER WAS THE MVP OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES?

That was pretty much us winning 'all that shit' with Parker absolutely leading the way. Nobody asked if he was better than Duncan because everyone knows he couldn't be. But that wasn't your point, was it?

[ThaBigFundamental21]

In their primes. I would easily take Manu tbh. Manu was our spark. He was clutch, he came through when we needed him most. When the team desperately needed a basket, I always knew Manu would slash to the hoop and lay it in. I never know where we are going to get that crucial basket anymore and am pleasantly surprised when someone hits a clutch shot. Manu is now a shell of himself, he is a good role player who can sometimes give you a little more. It's a shame, but father time is undefeated and Manu isn't that guy anymore. We have to rely more on Marco now.

[Kidd K]

Manu was definitely better. Tony had a tendency to disappear. However, Tony may not be at his peak yet so he COULD surpass peak Manu. Peak Manu was a beast. The Flying Spaghetti Monster. Did a lot of everything and was a pest all over the court.

Manu was always a comet though. You could see it and it looked spectacular, then it was gone for a long period of time until you could see it again. He never stayed really great for a whole season or good for several in a row without getting injured or dropping off.

On a game to game basis, it's a toss up and I can see the argument that Manu at his best can post a great game like Parker. On a seasonal basis, I'd take Parker since his best seasons were better than Manu's bests (not to mention there's more of them). Career, I'd take Parker. Playoff series basis, honestly, I would take Parker there too.

So I'm not sure what's meant by "peak" here, but in most cases I would take Parker. Gimmie last year's Parker or 2009 Parker over any year's Manu.

[skulls138]

What does Parker do on defense? Manu was one of the highest in the league in steals. He would cause pure chaos on D. With him it was like the Spurs had six players on the court instead of five. The opposition couldn't relax for a second.

Parker is the layup king and is severely underrated but I say Ginobili.

[Skull-1]

Manu was always a comet though. You could see it and it looked spectacular, then it was gone for a long period of time until you could see it again. He never stayed really great for a whole season or good for several in a row without getting injured or dropping off.

On a game to game basis, it's a toss up and I can see the argument that Manu at his best can post a great game like Parker. On a seasonal basis, I'd take Parker since his best seasons were better than Manu's bests (not to mention there's more of them). Career, I'd take Parker. Playoff series basis, honestly, I would take Parker there too.

So I'm not sure what's meant by "peak" here, but in most cases I would take Parker. Gimmie last year's Parker or 2009 Parker over any year's Manu.

Manu in 2005 was hard to beat though. So many things not even in the stats. I can't argue with your logic, though. As usual. :toast

[ThaBigFundamental21]

Manu was always a comet though. You could see it and it looked spectacular, then it was gone for a long period of time until you could see it again. He never stayed really great for a whole season or good for several in a row without getting injured or dropping off.

On a game to game basis, it's a toss up and I can see the argument that Manu at his best can post a great game like Parker. On a seasonal basis, I'd take Parker since his best seasons were better than Manu's bests (not to mention there's more of them). Career, I'd take Parker. Playoff series basis, honestly, I would take Parker there too.



So I'm not sure what's meant by "peak" here, but in most cases I would take Parker. Gimmie last year's Parker or 2009 Parker over any year's Manu.

05 Manu shits on 09 Parker. 09 Parker was good in the regular season, last years Parker was good too, but folded late in the Finals per par. Like I sad Manu was clutch, Parker is not. Sefalosha salivates when he gets to play the Spurs because he knows he's going to own Parker. People feared playing Manu, he owned them, he got into their heads, frustrated them and beat them. Manu caused players to get technicals and flagrantly foul him. He was one of the hardest guys to guard in the NBA during his prime. People forget so fast. But these are the same people who were calling for Tim Duncan's head 2 weeks ago.

[Holden_Caulfield]

Peak Manu was as good as Peak Kobe, tbh. Too bad his peak didnt last that long :cry

[Cry Havoc]

I don't have a horse in this race, tbh, but did Parker apologize for his Finals performance?..serious question, I didn't follow much of the Spurs' off-season news..if not, maybe he should have, since he was absolutely horrendous in the Finals..

At least Parker made his presence felt. Manu blew his wad in round 2 and promptly vanished.

[Kidd K]

05 Manu shits on 09 Parker. 09 Parker was good in the regular season, last years Parker was good too, but folded late in the Finals per par. Like I sad Manu was clutch, Parker is not. Sefalosha salivates when he gets to play the Spurs because he knows he's going to own Parker. People feared playing Manu, he owned them, he got into their heads, frustrated them and beat them. Manu caused players to get technicals and flagrantly foul him. He was one of the hardest guys to guard in the NBA during his prime. People forget so fast. But these are the same people who were calling for Tim Duncan's head 2 weeks ago.

2009 Parker was also good in the playoffs. Don't revise history. He averaged 28.6/7/4 a game on 55% shooting, but besides Duncan (who was starting to show his age) the rest of the team didn't step up and we lost to the Mavs in the first round. You know, the year Manu missed most of the season including the entire playoffs?

And he was only medicore in the Finals because he wa splaying with a hurt hamstring. He was good in the series before that, especially against the Grizzlies where he was amazing. But since we're talking about Manu here too, it's a joke to claim someone else folded in the Finals while uttering Ginobili's name in the same paragraph and not include him in that statement.

I know exactly how good Manu used to be, and I'm just not agreeing with these people who think shit like "Peak Manu was as good as Peak Kobe tbh". It isn't better than Parker's either. If you're talking about one single game, then sure maybe, but if we're talking about a season or a playoff series, then I have to disagree because it's simply not true.

[DAF86]

Parker has had back to back MVP caliber seasons, something Manu never really did. however, if we are strictly talking peaks, yeah i'd say Manu > Tony. Manu at his best was otherworldly

Mmmh, yes, yes he had in fact he has had three MVP caliber seasons in 4 years the only year he didin't have one being the one where he was injured most of the season. And that was playing with the likes of Bogans, Mason JR, Oberto, etc. not with this superstacked team, tbh.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3384468
http://www.nba.com/2010/news/05/02/james.mvp.ap/
http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/awards_2011.html

[DAF86]

That's debatable, but Parker has been more consistent and far less injury prone. It's easy to forget those times when Parker dropped high 30's games or 40+ while still racking up assists and not turning it over, because he's always getting 20+ games.

When Manu has a great game it's a lot more rare. Even in the past he typically didn't crack 30 very often. Parker has many a time.

Still, I won't entirely disagree. When Manu was good, he was real good.

Well, it's easier to crack 20 regularly when you play and shoot more, tbh. For what is worth Manu has more 40+ pts games than Tony in 144 less games.

[TheGreatYacht]

Manutards on this thread are hilarious, IMO. Manu can't even play 25 minutes a game without getting injured lol. Never seen that bald idiot run for MVP, never seen that bald idiot outplay Kobe like Parker outplays CP3, never seen that bald idiot be a Finals MVP, never seen that bald idiot thank his nut huggers

[TheGreatYacht]

Peak Manu could be better than Jordan on some days.

Manutard

[TheGreatYacht]

Peak Manu was as good as Peak Kobe, tbh. Too bad his peak didnt last that long :cry

Manutard

[TheGreatYacht]

Parker won game 1 for us and put us up 5 with 28 seconds to go in game 6.

he basically took us home and Pop + Manu crashed the bus within feet of the destination :lol

:lmao

[TheGreatYacht]

Does the OP ever get Manu's nut sack out of his mouth?

[Skull-1]

Parker won game 1 for us and put us up 5 with 28 seconds to go in game 6.

he basically took us home and Pop + Manu crashed the bus within feet of the destination :lol


Lol I missed this. Hahaha! :lmao

[ElNono]

http://www.trbailey.net/g2/d/20282-1/whambulance.gif

[Kool Bob Love]

http://bigmooz.com/image/2013/23/mj-laughing-gif-17678-hd-wallpapers.gif

[Johnny RIngo]

Manu and Tony both had their fair share of chokejobs throughout the years. Tony's been better in the regular season but never really that impressive in the playoffs. Manu had the better peak(2005) but he's also had more than a few disappointing playoff moments(on top of all the frequent injuries). They're both clearly 2nd option/3rd option players though. On another team, Ginobili would have broken down from playing extensive minutes years ago. On another team, Parker wouldn't look like an MVP candidate without Pop's system. Overall, Ginobili was the better player in his prime though.

[SpurSwag]

Give me peak Parker. Manu in his prime was such a beast, he could dominate in so many ways. It was pretty amazing to watch, and he always stepped up in the biggest moments.

However, with all that being said, what Parker's been doing the last 3-4 years has been incredible. He has been so consistent and has been truly been dominant. Obviously we lost last year, but we were a major collapse away from having Parker lead us to the championship against the Heat as the team's best player (though the hamstring injury probably made Duncan or Kawhi our best player for the series).

All in all, I actually think Parker is the most underrated player in NBA history with Manu not being too far behind

[Diego20]

Manutards on this thread are hilarious, IMO. Manu can't even play 25 minutes a game without getting injured lol. Never seen that bald idiot run for MVP, never seen that bald idiot outplay Kobe like Parker outplays CP3, never seen that bald idiot be a Finals MVP, never seen that bald idiot thank his nut huggers

He deserved the FINALS MVP in 2005 but Duncan won it because he's Duncan.

[TheGreatYacht]

He deserved the FINALS MVP in 2005 but Duncan won it because he's Duncan.

Duncan averaged 21ppg, 14rpg. Stfu, that clown deserves nothing after last year.

[Skull-1]

Duncan averaged 21ppg, 14rpg. Stfu, that clown deserves nothing after last year.

He deserves disdain!

[skulls138]

Meh. You guys are so ridiculous I cant take you serious.

[Brazil]

Prime Manu is a beast tbh he was a very solid defender and in offense he had the whole package: he could destroy you from mid range 3s at the rim by his passing. On some hot stretches few players are comparable. I have no issue saying peak Manu is better

[AntiChrist]

Parker still peaking

[kaji157]

I think Manu at his peak was a complete player, something Parker never could be, mainly because his size and court vision.
Ginobili was very good playing man to man defense, and zone defense (he was the top of the key defender playing the zone before Bowen became Bowen).
Offensivelly he almost got the whole package, penetration, over 40% 3pt range and a reliable midrange. Good passer and very reliable over the last quarters of the game. Evendoe he didn´t hit 30 very often, he usually had 8 - 12 points in the fourth.
Parker mastered the 3pt range latelly and has been passing better, but he never seemed to have Manu´s court vision, and his offensive game, even evolved, his defense has taken a toll in contrary.
Manu at his peak was everywhere on offense and defense. Parker was a very good defender but he has regresed in that aspect as he carried more offensive load.
I´d agree with the "peak Manu" better than "peak parker" in general, but Parker "peaked" longer than Manu to say the truth.
For now i am jut happy that Manu just delivered 16 fourth quarter points against a playoff team in a variety of ways like he used to do on consistent basis.

[lefty]

http://blogimages.thescore.com/tbj/files/2012/07/tony-parker-foggy-goggles.jpg

[HI-FI]

http://blogimages.thescore.com/tbj/files/2012/07/tony-parker-foggy-goggles.jpg

:lol
definitely explains his court vision problems


i'll take prime Manu.