Spurs: Manu Ginobili could have been a franchise player [Archive]

DAF86

12-20-2014, 06:42 PM

Not a Tim Duncan, Lebron James type of franchise player of course but a Steve Nash, Allen Iverson type. The kind of player that can be the face of a franchise for a long period of time, sell tickets and be relatively succesful. Let's say the 1999 draft happens again with the knowledge we all have now of how good each player is going to be. I think it's fair to say that Manu would go as the 1st pick (some may pick Baron Davis).

Do you imagine Manu Ginobili on a big market team like the Bulls with the hype of being the number one pick eurostepping, flopping, nut-megging and dunking on people faces all while playing great, efficient, team ball? Do you imagine the kind of attention this white/Latin/Italian folk would get? Tebow would be jelous of the kind of attention Manu would get.

So, does anyone really have a counterargument to this actually happening other than the overblown durability/injury prone thing?

lefty

12-20-2014, 06:54 PM

I agree tbh

He shits on Messi as well

N0 LyF3 ScRuB

12-20-2014, 06:59 PM

He easily would have averaged 25 in his prime. He probably would have averaged around 19-20 ppg when his career was set and done (putting into account he probably wouldn't be around today from injuries).

TDMVPDPOY

12-20-2014, 07:03 PM

franchise player? maybe.....but he wont be on the same tier as the other guys who are marketed very heavily, globally/arg he will have a market...but i dont think he be bigger star then those ahead of him...

DAF86

12-20-2014, 07:07 PM

TDMVPDPOY

12-20-2014, 07:16 PM

How long have you been rocking that sig, tbh?

lol just got it in the last 24hrs when i was surfing for prawn

DAF86

12-20-2014, 07:17 PM

lol just got it in the last 24hrs when i was surfing for prawn

How long 'till you get censored bro?

TDMVPDPOY

12-20-2014, 07:20 PM

How long 'till you get censored bro?

hahahaa when i get a warning i will remove it...other then that dont concentrate on the tits, concentrate on that hoola hoop

midnightpulp

12-20-2014, 07:48 PM

No he couldn't have.

1. Too injury prone in his prime (not an overblown fact).

2. Body is not built sturdy enough for his style of play, which is why he was so injury prone and why his minutes were watched.

3. Gets gassed when required to play 35 or more minutes.

4. No post game, which is an important weapon a (franchise) perimeter player has needed since Jordan redefined the position in that regard.

ElNono

12-20-2014, 08:08 PM

1. Too injury prone in his prime (not an overblown fact).

Baloney. He was rarely hurt in his prime. Played over 82 games in his first 6 seasons in the league.

2. Body is not built sturdy enough for his style of play, which is why he was so injury prone and why his minutes were watched.

I don't know about his body not built sturdy enough, he wouldn't be still playing at 37 if that would be the case. Certainly not an athletic freak, etc.

3. Gets gassed when required to play 35 or more minutes.

We'll never know, but I think this is more on Pop than anything else. He certainly used to play 35+ minutes in the NT, playing games every other day, and he was finishing those games just fine.

4. No post game, which is an important weapon a (franchise) perimeter player has needed since Jordan redefined the position in that regard.

This is legit. Although, if he would've been asked to lead a franchise, his development and role might've taken him towards that road. The Spurs obviously didn't need that with TD in the post.

I still would agree he wouldn't have been a franchise player, at least not for long. He came to the NBA basically in his peak, and had only a 4 year window... it's different from guys that came to the league early, like Dirk....

midnightpulp

12-20-2014, 08:22 PM

Baloney. He was rarely hurt in his prime. Played over 82 games in his first 6 seasons in the league.

?

Manu has never played a full 82 game season in his career. And that's with him averaging less than 30 minutes per game.

I don't know about his body not built sturdy enough, he wouldn't be still playing at 37 if that would be the case. Certainly not an athletic freak, etc.

He's not muscular enough to handle the constant contact his style of play demands (as the franchise player playing 35-40 minutes per game over an 82 game regular season + playoffs with the defense being primarily focused on you). Wade has a similar style, and look at the havoc it's wreaked on his body. Sure, Manu could've put on mass, but that would probably take away some of his attributes: speed, body coordination, even stamina.

We'll never know, but I think this is more on Pop than anything else. He certainly used to play 35+ minutes in the NT, playing games every other day, and he was finishing those games just fine.

But not in the NBA, which is more physical than FIBA.

Samuel Eto'o

12-20-2014, 08:26 PM

Kool Bob Love

12-20-2014, 08:28 PM

05 Manu >>>>>>

ElNono

12-20-2014, 08:35 PM

Manu has never played a full 82 game season in his career. And that's with him averaging less than 30 minutes per game.

:lol why are you leaving out playoff games? Especially since we were going deep in the playoffs almost every year. I do stand corrected though, I think in his 4th season he "only" played 78 games.

what other "injury prone" player averaged as many games? You can look in basketball-reference, but IIRC, he's up there in the list of active players with the most games in the league.

He's not muscular enough to handle the constant contact his style of play demands (as the franchise player playing 35-40 minutes per game over an 82 game regular season + playoffs with the defense being primarily focused on you). Wade has a similar style, and look at the havoc it's wreaked on his body. Sure, Manu could've put on mass, but that would probably take away some of his attributes: speed, body coordination, even stamina.

I don't disagree with this, plus Manu never had the freakish athleticism that Wade, Kobe were born with... which IMO, speaks volumes of how good he's been...

But not in the NBA, which is more physical than FIBA.

He certainly beat NBA players back then, more than once... but, it's certainly a small sample, and we will really never know, so it doesn't matter.

midnightpulp

12-20-2014, 08:36 PM

No, he couldn't have. I get that he's a local hero so Argentinians support him more than a German with a questionable past, but the fact is he was extremely lucky to play in a great system with great players and coach.

Manu could flourish on any team, regardless of system. He's one of the best at getting to the rim I've seen. Great shooter in his prime. Great playmaker when he isn't being retarded. He often destroyed American competition in International play (yes, FIBA :lol, but it still shows he's not a product of the Spurs system).

My issues with him are:

1. It's extremely difficult to build around a perimeter player who isn't some transcendent talent like Jordan, Lebron, Bird, etc. Manu isn't on the level, obviously.

2. Durability. He penetrates with no regard. I can't see his body holding up for 10 seasons/36mpg as the franchise player on any particular team.

3. No post game. Decent, at best, mid-range game. Any franchise level perimeter player absolutely needs to have those skills (at an elite level) in his arsenal.

Spur-Addict

12-20-2014, 08:39 PM

Thread

12-20-2014, 08:39 PM

You can't adequately judge him now, because the brain is filled with the compromised Manu. Even if you reach back for the prime Manu, the other waters it down and makes one want to flee the exercise.

& it should.

midnightpulp

12-20-2014, 08:54 PM

:lol why are you leaving out playoff games? Especially since we were going deep in the playoffs almost every year. I do stand corrected though, I think in his 4th season he "only" played 78 games.

what other "injury prone" player averaged as many games? You can look in basketball-reference, but IIRC, he's up there in the list of active players with the most games in the league.

I don't disagree with this, plus Manu never had the freakish athleticism that Wade, Kobe were born with... which IMO, speaks volumes of how good he's been...

He certainly beat NBA players back then, more than once... but, it's certainly a small sample, and we will really never know, so it doesn't matter.

Because our thought experiment here is centered on the premise of whether or not Manu can be a franchise player, i.e., the number one player on the team. One of the most important attributes a franchise player can have is durability. Let's say Manu was drafted by a fringe playoff team and made his debut for them in the '03 season. From '03 to '13, he had 4 seasons in which he played less than 70 games, the lowest being 44 (and I'n not counting the lockout). Compare this to Lebron James, who has never had one season playing less than 70 games. Pre-Achilles Kobe, since becoming the Lakers' franchise guy in '05, has only had one season playing less than 70 games ('05, where they purposely sat him out to tank). I acknowledge the fact that Kobe was somewhat injury prone as the number 2 guy during the 3 peat years, but he also had a more aggressive style in those days, which illustrates my point of how hard it is to maintain durability playing like that.

Since Manu never developed a lethal mid range shot or post game, I don't see how he could hold up for multiple seasons being a team's centerpiece.

N0 LyF3 ScRuB

12-20-2014, 08:56 PM

ElNono

12-20-2014, 09:13 PM

Because our thought experiment here is centered on the premise of whether or not Manu can be a franchise player, i.e., the number one player on the team.

:lol no, we were discussing your claim that he was injury prone in his prime. He wasn't. He played more games in his first 6 seasons than your average NBA player.

That's all. Already said I didn't think he could've been a franchise player... I just think the injury prone card gets thrown around without much basis... later in his career? maybe. But in his prime he was pretty healthy.

midnightpulp

12-20-2014, 09:27 PM

N0 LyF3 ScRuB

12-20-2014, 09:30 PM

Why are we only limiting his prime to his first 6 seasons?

'08. Hobbled in the playoffs. Shut down by Sasha.

'09. Hurt the majority of the season. Missed the playoffs.

'11. All star year. Got hurt going into the playoffs.

And this with being on a minute restriction. He's an injury prone player. It's why Pop has kid gloved him for all these years.

T-Mac was a franchise player, as was Marbury, Francis, etc. You are being a bit square.

midnightpulp

12-20-2014, 09:31 PM

T-Mac was a franchise player, as was Marbury, Francis, etc. You are being a bit square.

:lmao

C'mon now.

N0 LyF3 ScRuB

12-20-2014, 09:31 PM

:lmao

C'mon now.

They were. Just because it didn't pan out does not change the fact.

ElNono

12-20-2014, 09:38 PM

Why are we only limiting his prime to his first 6 seasons?

Because that was his prime.

I said it in the first post I replied to you: he came to the league late, already blossomed in Europe, his "window" was about 4 years at his peak... that's actually probably the biggest knock to call him a "franchise player".

I would've been intrigued if he came over young, gone to the college game here... I'm sure they would've worked some PEDs on his body. But, we'll never know now.

midnightpulp

12-20-2014, 09:41 PM

Because that was his prime.

I said it in the first post I replied to you: he came to the league late, already blossomed in Europe, his "window" was about 4 years at his peak... that's actually probably the biggest knock to call him a "franchise player".

I would've been intrigued if he came over young, gone to the college game here... I'm sure they would've worked some PEDs on his body. But, we'll never know now.

I'd say he was still prime level up until '11, a year where he made the All Star team. 33 isn't that old.

Arcadian

12-20-2014, 09:43 PM

He's a slasher/shooter. No post/midrange game = no deal.

HemisfairArena

12-20-2014, 09:49 PM

He's a slasher/shooter. No post/midrange game = no deal.

So was Iverson and he was definitely a franchise player.

ElNono

12-20-2014, 09:53 PM

I'd say he was still prime level up until '11, a year where he made the All Star team. 33 isn't that old.

Meh, he has always been wild and a joy to watch, and he certainly looked better at 33 than other player I rather not name, but most NBA players on the wrong side of 30 start to slowly decline, especially those with a lot of miles...

FWIW, here's a list of most playoffs games amongst active players (Manu #4):
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/g_active_p.html

And most regular season games amongst active players (Manu #43):
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/g_active.html

I can't think of any players around him that anybody would call "injury prone"... I think the whole "injury prone" thing is a bit of a canard...

If you wanna look at injury prone, look at Mo Williams... heck, is Kawhi injury prone?

Spurs9

12-20-2014, 09:53 PM

http://i.imgur.com/VO7tXdE.gifhttp://i.imgur.com/VO7tXdE.gifhttp://i.imgur.com/VO7tXdE.gif

DAF86

12-22-2014, 12:50 PM

No he couldn't have.

1. Too injury prone in his prime (not an overblown fact).

1st season: 93 games (and he had some DNCD's)
2nd season: 87 games
3rd season: 97 games
4th season: 78 games
5th season: 95 games
6th season: 91 games
7th season: 44 games (the first and only season seriously reduced by injuries)
8th season: 85 games
9th season: 85 games
10th season: 48 games (lockout)
11th season: 81 games
12th season: 91 games

I don't know about you but that seems like a shit lot of games played by a guy that is suppossedly injury prone. Let's not forget he has been playing professional basketball since age 18, which means he has played for 20 years with only one trully season ending injury.

Injury prone fame=overblown as fuck

2. Body is not built sturdy enough for his style of play, which is why he was so injury prone and why his minutes were watched.

See above

3. Gets gassed when required to play 35 or more minutes.

I've seen him play for 35 minutes or more for quite some years and he did just fine, tbh.

4. No post game, which is an important weapon a (franchise) perimeter player has needed since Jordan redefined the position in that regard.

Didn't you read the OP? I don't think Manu can be an elite franchise player ala Tim Duncan or Lebron James but a second or third tier franchise player like Steve Nash or Allen Iverson. What kind of post game did those guys have?

FkLA

12-22-2014, 01:44 PM

Yeah, I don't get the post-up game part either. Hes a two-guard.

He was one of the hardest guys to stay in font of and one of the best finishers in the league during his prime. Add to that the fact that hes had arguably the best vision/passing of any two guard ever+his unselfishness...and I don't see why he couldn't have been the best player on a solid NBA team.

DAF86

12-23-2014, 11:52 AM

Manu himself said he wouldn't have been able to handle big minutes consistently, so even he knows his durability couldn't sustain the type of heavy lifting required to be the man every night for the vast majority of his career.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1KLIxklbyM

4:15 mark

Pop: Do you think you could play 35 minutes per game? Manu: Nah, impossible... but maybe at 27, 28.

Translation: Of course I could have played 35 minutes per game during my prime you smelly old man.

scanry

12-23-2014, 12:08 PM

4:15 mark

Translation: Of course I could have played 35 minutes per game during my prime you smelly old man.

I think he means 27-28 minutes tbh.

DAF86

12-23-2014, 12:11 PM

I think he means 27-28 minutes tbh.

Nah, he clearly says "but maybe at 27, 28"; meaning "maybe at age 27, 28"; really meaning "I have played 35 min per game before, of course I can do it you fuck zitted face you"

DMC

01-04-2015, 02:03 PM

Manu says "maybe at 27, 28.... I could".

DAF86

02-06-2017, 07:17 PM

The more advanced statistics get, the more Manu Ginobili stands out - Pounding The Rock
http://www.poundingtherock.com/2017/2/6/14496094/advanced-statistics-manu-ginobili-stands-out.

What a great career for our Manu has had as a Spur. It has been such a privilege to watch him play.

One of the best to ever do it. Period.

ambchang

02-06-2017, 07:59 PM

Ginobili will go down as one of the, if not the, most underrated players in the history of the league.

DAF86

02-06-2017, 08:12 PM

He's a slasher/shooter. No post/midrange game = no deal.

This is retarded. Harden plays literally the same game Manu plays and he is going to win MVP.

DAF86

02-06-2017, 08:15 PM

That's another point in favour of Manu: his get to the hole or three pointer style was a trend setter.

DAF86

05-23-2017, 12:15 AM

866862152711274496

Yeah, I think he would have done OK as a franchise player, tbh.

namlook

05-24-2017, 10:07 PM

Not a Tim Duncan, Lebron James type of franchise player of course but a Steve Nash, Allen Iverson type....

Unlikely. He was effective because he was skilled but just as important because his minutes were carefully controlled and limited. Put him out there for 35 minutes a night like a franchise player and he wouldn't be the same player. As a franchise guy who is the focal point of an opposing defense he would also struggle against the double and triple teams the franchise players get.

DAF86

05-25-2017, 12:02 AM

Unlikely. He was effective because he was skilled but just as important because his minutes were carefully controlled and limited. Put him out there for 35 minutes a night like a franchise player and he wouldn't be the same player. As a franchise guy who is the focal point of an opposing defense he would also struggle against the double and triple teams the franchise players get.

Implying Manu wasn't given main guy defensive attention by opponents when he was the Spurs closer for years. :lol

Folks were like "yeah, we know the game is on the line and Ginobili is probably going to get the ball, but we are not going to guard him that much 'cause, tecnically, he isn't the franchise guy" :lol:lol:lol

I thought mainstream, vanilla, stupid ass takes like this had died out, but apparently there's still a lot of retards out there.

Thread

05-25-2017, 02:26 AM

He's so parochial though. More or less a toiler.

spurraider21

05-25-2017, 12:02 PM

so according to mid, manu couldn't be a franchise player because no post game, but then criticizes kawhi's post game as antiquated

140

05-25-2017, 12:03 PM

so according to mid, manu couldn't be a franchise player because no post game, but then criticizes kawhi's post game as antiquated
:lol

DAF86

05-25-2017, 12:10 PM

so according to mid, manu couldn't be a franchise player because no post game, but then criticizes kawhi's post game as antiquated

Was thinking exactly the same. :lol

hater

05-25-2017, 03:02 PM

Mediocre player that had the fortune to play next to Timmy and Tony

He would have been a franchise player in Europe

But in the US of A he wouldnt even take the toros to thenplayoffs

Thread

05-25-2017, 03:28 PM

Mediocre player that had the fortune to play next to Timmy and Tony

He would have been a franchise player in Europe

But in the US of A he wouldnt even take the toros to thenplayoffs

hater, with the sensible goods.

DMC

05-25-2017, 05:22 PM

Manu wasn't cut out to be a franchise player. There are times when he's put the team on his back but those are few and far between. Franchise players rise. You might see Jamal Crawford coming off the bench but you won't see LeBron James or Kevin Durant coming off the bench.

Manu didn't really get much better after he got into the league. He had the same style of play as always the Spurs just learned how to deal with it. Yes he is incredibly good but franchise player means more than that.

He could have been a starter his entire career however and easily been a second or third banana on a really good team other than the Spurs.

Barfunk

05-26-2017, 12:39 AM

"If Ginobili was on any other team as the main guy, he would average 25 ppg" - Charles Barkley 2005 paraphrased. I'm thinking more along the lines of about a 22 ppg career scorer. We can't prove this of course, but damn, go back and watch the videos of prime Ginobili, circa 2005. He was soooo damn good. His athleticism was also very underrated when he was young. He came in the league too late, and simply sacrificed stats for Pop's system, and bigger picture thinking.

Thread

05-26-2017, 03:42 AM

Good to see him & Pop graveled in Miami & State. Always walkin' around with your noses stuck in the air. Always dishin' it. Now you got a abundant taste of it. You suffered as others have suffered. You ain't immune. You ain't nothin' special. Sure, it's never enough and I want to see you stay down in that mud & puke.

Love always,

- Dale

ambchang

05-26-2017, 05:51 AM

hater

05-26-2017, 08:52 AM

Thread

05-26-2017, 10:52 AM

Why u bring up Miami? They went back there the folloring year and beheaded Lebron.

Yes, that was your 2nd 1st 5th.

DAF86

05-26-2017, 03:41 PM

DAF86

05-26-2017, 03:46 PM

Capt Bringdown

05-27-2017, 12:48 PM

DMC

05-27-2017, 03:32 PM

James Harden came off the bench, and he would still be coming off the bench if the Thunder's owner wasn't so cheap, and he's an MVP caliber player.

What's with all the goalpost moving in this fucking place? Who said anything about Harden?

You'd love to shift the focus from your countryman to James Harden but Harden came off the bench for only a couple years or so, and won a 6th man in the process. Manu has come off the bench most of his NBA career. If Manu had the offers Harden had he probably would have left.

DMC

05-27-2017, 03:41 PM

If folks (even Spurs fans) don't realize Manu could have been a franchise player, after seeing his diluted copycat version pull multiple MVP seasons, then I don't know what else to say. I guess basketball understanding isn't for anyone, tbh.

Yes, everyone who doesn't agree that your countryman could not head a serious franchise must be basketball ignorant. Great rationale.

I think it's a misconception that Ginobili became a 6th man only to help the team. He became a 6th man partly because his body couldn't withstand playing 82 games with starters minutes. Had Ginobili been treated like a franchise player, his body would have broken down in a couple years.

DAF86

05-27-2017, 05:06 PM

/thread

Smh. "Spurs fan" not realizing how good his players are.

DAF86

05-27-2017, 05:11 PM

What's with all the goalpost moving in this fucking place? Who said anything about Harden?

You'd love to shift the focus from your countryman to James Harden but Harden came off the bench for only a couple years or so, and won a 6th man in the process. Manu has come off the bench most of his NBA career. If Manu had the offers Harden had he probably would have left.

How is bringing Harden "goalpost moving", when talking about franchise players that used to come off the bench? :lol

Prime Ginobili is better than Harden. The beard is basically Manu minus the competitive edge, the intangibles, clutchness and defense.

DAF86

05-27-2017, 05:14 PM

And you can bet your sweet ass that if prime Manu was available right now, analytics freak Morey would have thrown max money to the ultimate efficient layup or three player.

benefactor

05-27-2017, 05:18 PM

I love Manu as much as the next guy but ignoring the durability concerns doesn't make them go away. Is talented enough to be a franchise player? Absolutely. Could he handle the workload demanded of one? Highly unlikely.

DMC

05-27-2017, 06:00 PM

How is bringing Harden "goalpost moving", when talking about franchise players that used to come off the bench? :lol

Prime Ginobili is better than Harden. The beard is basically Manu minus the competitive edge, the intangibles, clutchness and defense.

I wasn't talking about franchise players who come off the bench. I was talking about Manu Ginobili. The OP doesn't ask if a bench player can ever be a franchise player.

Which team had a worse franchise player than Manu would have been, in Manu's prime?

DMC

05-27-2017, 06:08 PM

And you can bet your sweet ass that if prime Manu was available right now, analytics freak Morey would have thrown max money to the ultimate efficient layup or three player.

You saw how Morey's team did against a team of scrubs, at home in a close out game in the 2nd round of the playoffs. You shouldn't go that route.

Barfunk

05-27-2017, 10:08 PM

DMC

05-28-2017, 01:01 AM

Damn, I don't know what to say. Lol, I had a pretty good paragraph on Manu written but I hit the back button, lol. I don't give a fuck man, Manu was the shiiit. It's no coincidence the Spurs won all these chips with him as well as his country winning Gold in 04.

Love Manu, but all the Manu love doesn't mean he could have been a franchise guy on a decent team. Could Rip Hamilton have been one?

And :lol OP, Iverson won a league MVP and basically drug Eric Snow's ass to the Finals. Nash won b2b MVPs in years where legit talent was breathing down his neck.

Manu was never Nash/Iverson level. He was more the level of Jordan Crawford or Jason Terry. In Manu's prime years he was ranked like 47th in the league or something like that.

Spurtacular

05-28-2017, 02:01 AM

I was thinking of this today. Manu could've been a 28 and 9 guy and been in contention for MVPs on another team. And frankly, he was initially a great "two way player." His defensive prowess/tenacity when he came into the league was a sight to behold. I just loved watching him play for that reason alone.

spurraider21

05-28-2017, 03:21 AM

Love Manu, but all the Manu love doesn't mean he could have been a franchise guy on a decent team. Could Rip Hamilton have been one?

And :lol OP, Iverson won a league MVP and basically drug Eric Snow's ass to the Finals. Nash won b2b MVPs in years where legit talent was breathing down his neck.

Manu was never Nash/Iverson level. He was more the level of Jordan Crawford or Jason Terry. In Manu's prime years he was ranked like 47th in the league or something like that.
47th in what

DMC

05-28-2017, 12:07 PM

47th in what

overall

spurraider21

05-28-2017, 01:58 PM

overall
well lets take 2007-2008 where he was:

33rd in points per game
29th in assists per game
13th in steals per game
12th in win shares
11th in TS%
7th in PER
6th in win shares/48 min
3rd in BPM
5th in VORP

you would say he was somewhere close to 47th best player in the league?

ajh18

05-28-2017, 02:03 PM

The numbers from 2005-2008 suggest Manu had a 3-5 year stretch where he was at minimum a ~top-10 player in the league. MVP candidate on a different team? Who knows. With more minutes he may have put up the numbers to do so, or his body might have broken down.

Not sure there's any evidence for this "47th best player" talk though.

FkLA

05-28-2017, 02:50 PM

well lets take 2007-2008 where he was:

33rd in points per game
29th in assists per game
13th in steals per game
12th in win shares
11th in TS%
7th in PER
6th in win shares/48 min
3rd in BPM
5th in VORP

you would say he was somewhere close to 47th best player in the league?

Irrelevant.

How many 60 point games did he have? 50 point games? Did he even have a single, measly 40 point game that year?

FkLA

05-28-2017, 03:03 PM

You can argue that he would've been retired for a few years by now if he had had that type of responsibility but Manu could've absolutely been a franchise player for 5-8 years. In the Summer of '04 he was leading Mexico to gold in the Olympics and in Spring of '10 he arguably looked like a Top 5 player with Parker injured/Timmy looking done. He was still the best player on the '11 team too.

monosylab1k

05-28-2017, 03:19 PM

I'm the last thing from a Manu homer and even I know he would have been a franchise player for another team. I mean, technically Michael Finley was a franchise player for 3-4 years in Dallas, so it's pretty obvious Manu could have been one. But I also feel pretty confident in saying he would never win a ring in that role either.

spurraider21

05-28-2017, 03:33 PM

Irrelevant.

How many 60 point games did he have? 50 point games? Did he even have a single, measly 40 point game that year?he dropped a couple of 40 point games that year, against the timperpuppies and the cavs

UZER

05-28-2017, 03:45 PM

Sure... For two years, maybe. Then he'd be broken and on his way out of the league.

DMC

05-28-2017, 04:17 PM

You guys are making the concept of "franchise player" nebulous, especially if you think Michael Finley was one. He was a starter, and a good one, but Dirk was the franchise. The Mavs didn't build a team around Michael Finley, not really. How many franchise players does a team have?

I consider each team to have basically one at any given time. You have a big 3 system where Manu was indeed a franchise player although off the bench, but if you want to consider he wasn't a franchise player even though he was part of the big 3, then you're saying he has to be a starter and perhaps even the face of the franchise.

I'm still waiting for someone to list the players on the 30 NBA teams who were faces of the franchise, that Manu would replace.

spurraider21

05-28-2017, 04:33 PM

FkLA

05-28-2017, 04:38 PM

lefty20

05-28-2017, 04:48 PM

Manu was a fucking beast, and he definitely could've been a franchise player. Not sure how long his body would've held up, but that's a different debate. Those who disagree can fuck off.

DMC

05-28-2017, 05:09 PM

in the 07-08 season, if we're sticking to that one as an example, the wizards made the playoffs and their leading scorer/best player was antawn jamison. the sixers with iguodala. the hawks were a playoff team (albeit with 37 wins) led by joe johnson with averages of 22 points and 6 assists, in a season where ginobili averaged 20 and 5 in 9 less minutes. the pistons were the #2 seed in the east... who was their franchise player? chauncey billups?

in the west you had the jazz with deron williams and carlos boozer running the show.

and that's just among playoff teams, if you're making that a cutoff for a franchise player. otherwise you had guys like kevin martin, al jefferson, brandon roy, rudy gay, danny granger, ben gordon, michael redd, zach randolph/jamal crawford (knicks), gerald wallace/jason richardson (bobcats) all as the faces of their respective teams

Manu averaged his points against 2nd units. You have to factor that in. You cannot have a franchise guy for that one year when he was good.

Pick one, Boozer or Willams, which was the franchise player?

Sixers just traded their franchise guy (Allen Iverson) to Denver, leaving AI as the best player on the team. They didn't build around Andre Iguodala.
Gilbert Arenas was the Wizards franchise player. He was injured most of the season leaving Jamison to lead the team. That doesn't make him the franchise guy since they didn't build around him.

You cannot make a franchise guy out of a 1 year prime person.

From Wiki:

In professional sports, a franchise player is an athlete who is not simply the best player on their team, but one that the team can build their "franchise" around for the foreseeable future. The term may be used alongside a particular position name to describe a player, such as a "franchise quarterback" in American football.

So the examples you gave were just "best on the team" guys. They weren't franchise players. Tell me a franchise player was worse than Manu Ginobili. Tell me a franchise that could have built it's roster around Manu as the central piece.

DMC

05-28-2017, 05:11 PM

lol fat boy just got destroyed

You scrape any more money together yet to back up your take or you still chickenshit?

spurraider21

05-28-2017, 05:17 PM

Manu averaged his points against 2nd units. You have to factor that in. You cannot have a franchise guy for that one year when he was good.

AK47 was better than Manu in the Williams/Boozer days.

Sixers just traded their franchise guy (Allen Iverson) to Denver, leaving AI as the best player on the team. They didn't build around Andre Iguodala.
Gilbert Arenas was the Wizards franchise player. He was injured most of the season leaving Jamison to lead the team. That doesn't make him the franchise guy since they didn't build around him.

You cannot make a franchise guy out of a 1 year prime person.

From Wiki:

In professional sports, a franchise player is an athlete who is not simply the best player on their team, but one that the team can build their "franchise" around for the foreseeable future. The term may be used alongside a particular position name to describe a player, such as a "franchise quarterback" in American football.

So the examples you gave were just "best on the team" guys. They weren't franchise players. Tell me a franchise player was worse than Manu Ginobili. Tell me a franchise that could have built it's roster around Manu as the central piece.
- you cant say definitively that manu went up against second teamers. he played starters minutes, and you can't say with any certainty that ginobili's in/out schedule lined up exactly with his counterpart on the other team. such that if they were playing against the lakers, just because the spurs subbed manu in doesn't mean the lakers subbed kobe out.

- ok, lets say AK47 was better than manu. good for him. we all know dirk is a franchise player. but i cant say "well, duncan was better than dirk, so if the spurs acquired dirk, does that mean he's no longer a franchise player?" he's still of that caliber. same goes for manu here, and that's assuming we agree that ak > manu. and during that time period, i wouldn't agree with that whatsoever. kirilenko's output declined pretty drastically around 2006

- iverson left the sixers during the 06-07 season, and iggy was their best player until 2012. thats a significant stretch including several playoff runs

- i agree that you cant make a franchise guy out of a 1 year prime. i initially used the 07-08 year specifically to show where manu ranked among his peers in various stats (both box and advanced), and just went along with that to make a point. manu was of that caliber from about 2005-2011

DMC

05-28-2017, 05:26 PM

- you cant say definitively that manu went up against second teamers. he played starters minutes, and you can't say with any certainty that ginobili's in/out schedule lined up exactly with his counterpart on the other team. such that if they were playing against the lakers, just because the spurs subbed manu in doesn't mean the lakers subbed kobe out.

1st, Manu was a franchise player in SA. The bench was built around him constantly. He wasn't the face of the franchise, but he was absolutely a "build around" guy for many years. It was just the bench that was built to Manu's style of play.
2nd, because Manu was a bench player, you can say with enough certainty that he played 2nd units more often than 1st units. Otherwise what's the point of the thread?
If you just want the benefit of the doubt that maybe Manu played most of his minutes against starters, you'll need to figure that one out. Bench players are bench players, 2nd units, and called that for a reason.

- ok, lets say AK47 was better than manu. good for him. we all know dirk is a franchise player. but i cant say "well, duncan was better than dirk, so if the spurs and mavs swapped duncan and dirk, dirk would no longer be a franchise player." he's still of that caliber, and that's assuming we agree that ak > manu

Duncan was a franchise player and so was Dirk. AK47 wasn't a franchise player so if you agree AK47 was better than Manu (questionable) then you have to consider that Manu wouldn't have been a better player on that team, so why would they build around him instead of Boozer/Williams?

- iverson left the sixers during the 06-07 season, and iggy was their best player until 2012. thats a significant stretch including several playoff runs

Best player /= franchise player. You cited that season specifically. You cannot stretch it out to other seasons unless you also want to look at Manu's effectiveness then as well. For the season you cherry picked, AI was not a franchise player.

- i agree that you cant make a franchise guy out of a 1 year prime. i initially used the 07-08 year specifically to show where manu ranked among his peers in various stats (both box and advanced), and just went along with that to make a point. manu was of that caliber from about 2005-2011
You cherry picked the best year you could find. This we know. So live with that season unless you want to move the goalpost forward or back to another season.

spurraider21

05-28-2017, 06:17 PM

You cited that season specifically. You cannot stretch it out to other seasons unless you also want to look at Manu's effectiveness then as well. For the season you cherry picked, AI was not a franchise player.

You cherry picked the best year you could find. This we know. So live with that season unless you want to move the goalpost forward or back to another season.so on one hand, you tell me that we cant use a 1 season sample to determine that somebody is a franchise player, yet on the other hand you insist that we stick to one season. you're all over the place

ElNono

05-28-2017, 06:25 PM

DMC

05-28-2017, 07:03 PM

so on one hand, you tell me that we cant use a 1 season sample to determine that somebody is a franchise player, yet on the other hand you insist that we stick to one season. you're all over the place

You used the one season sample so you need to stick with that season. You cannot take 2007 Manu and consider him as a franchise player on a 2012 team.

DMC

05-28-2017, 07:07 PM

It's always a tough question, even with players that franchises decided to build around and didn't pan out (or did)... for example, there was little doubt Dirk with the Mavs was a 'franchise player' because that's the role he had, but until they broke out and won that ring, there were always questions whether he should be in that 'franchise player' category or was a 2nd wheel...

In Manu's case, he was the top dog everywhere but the NBA, and willingly so. So I don't generally get into these discussions, because there's a lot of coulda, shoulda that you just can't prove. I am of the opinion that he could've been but then his career would've been way shorter, especially since he came relatively late in his career to the NBA...

But then anyone could have been if the team built around them. Just look at Randle, Ingram or Russell in LA. When Magic said everyone is trade bait except Ingram, then you consider Ingram a franchise guy, but if Paul George comes over, Paul George is now the franchise guy until Ingram proves to be the next coming of some GOAT, at which time he's the franchise guy.

I think on teams like SA where they have a "big 3", there's a franchise group. Manu was part of that. Tim was the center piece, no doubt, but the franchise ran the team as a group of 3 and built around them. Kawhi is now the franchise guy. There's little doubt of that.

Let's assume for arguendo that Tim and Tony leave in 2008. Does Manu become the franchise player or does Pop bring in a superstar?

ElNono

05-28-2017, 07:14 PM

But then anyone could have been if the team built around them. Just look at Randle, Ingram or Russell in LA. When Magic said everyone is trade bait except Ingram, then you consider Ingram a franchise guy, but if Paul George comes over, Paul George is now the franchise guy until Ingram proves to be the next coming of some GOAT, at which time he's the franchise guy.

I think on teams like SA where they have a "big 3", there's a franchise group. Manu was part of that. Tim was the center piece, no doubt, but the franchise ran the team as a group of 3 and built around them. Kawhi is now the franchise guy. There's little doubt of that.

It's more like the franchise actively tried. With Ingram, I don't know that happened yet. KG in the Wolves was a 'franchise player', even though it's debatable he was successful there at that.

The Spurs never really tried, so that's why this is more or less a moot question that goes into the imaginary. I think he was talented enough to do it, had the guts and charisma to do it, he also had the stamina in his prime to do it (IIRC, he played all the way to the WCF, and starting, in 2004, then won Olympics over the summer, then followed up with a championship being arguably the best player in the Finals in 2005). Now his career would've probably ended by 2007, tbh...

DAF86

05-28-2017, 10:12 PM

I wasn't talking about franchise players who come off the bench. I was talking about Manu Ginobili. The OP doesn't ask if a bench player can ever be a franchise player.

Which team had a worse franchise player than Manu would have been, in Manu's prime?

Off the top of my head and teams that have made the playoffs, the Sonics with Ray Allen, the Sixers with Iverson, the Suns with Stephon Marbury, the Pistons with whoever you wanna say was their franchise player, the Warriors with Baron Davis. And there are many, many more, easily more than half the league had worse franchise players than Manu. The Bulls (the team that should have drafted Manu with the number one pick of the 99 draft) had Ben fucking Gordon as their go to guy.

Seriously, this shit shouldn't even be debatable.

DMC

05-28-2017, 10:19 PM

Off the top of my head and teams that have made the playoffs, the Sonics with Ray Allen, the Sixers with Iverson, the Suns with Stephon Marbury, the Pistons with whoever you wanna say was their franchise player, the Warriors with Baron Davis. And there are many, many more, easily more than half the league had worse franchise players than Manu. The Bulls (the team that should have drafted Manu with the number one pick of the 99 draft) had Ben fucking Gordon as their go to guy.

:lol really? You think Manu was a better player than Ray Allen and Allen Iverson? :lol the homerism here knows no bounds.

You say who their franchise player was (Pistons) since you picked them.

You guys think the best player on the team is automatically the franchise player. That's not the case. Manu could be (still) the best player on the Lakers. Wouldn't make him a franchise player.

DAF86

05-28-2017, 10:21 PM

You saw how Morey's team did against a team of scrubs, at home in a close out game in the 2nd round of the playoffs. You shouldn't go that route.

I shouldn't go the route of the guy who put toghether the 4th best tesm on the NBA? If you say so.

DMC

05-28-2017, 10:24 PM

I shouldn't go the route of the guy who put toghether the 4th best tesm on the NBA? If you say so.

Something like that, less garbled.

Someone who hires Mike D to form a run and shoot offense with little to no defense and pays a guy absurd amounts to spend all night making it rain at the club as he mails it in during the playoffs, I wouldn't trust that guy one lick.

4th best team in the league... lol if you say so.

DAF86

05-28-2017, 10:27 PM

:lol really? You think Manu was a better player than Ray Allen and Allen Iverson? :lol the homerism here knows no bounds.

You say who their franchise player was (Pistons) since you picked them.

You guys think the best player on the team is automatically the franchise player. That's not the case. Manu could be (still) the best player on the Lakers. Wouldn't make him a franchise player.

Yeah, he is better than both. Iverson is my favourite player ever and I watched as many of his games as I could, and that's why I know of his many limitations. A 5'11'' guy taking 30 mid range fadeaways per game at a 40% clip isn't very conductive to winning, tbh. That's why he never won anything, not even with team US against Euro scrubs.

DAF86

05-28-2017, 10:36 PM

Something like that, less garbled.

Someone who hires Mike D to form a run and shoot offense with little to no defense and pays a guy absurd amounts to spend all night making it rain at the club as he mails it in during the playoffs, I wouldn't trust that guy one lick.

4th best team in the league... lol if you say so.

By record they were actually the 3rd best team in the NBA.

Anyway, Morey isn't the only guy that would have thrown max money to Manu in today's NBA. Folks that run NBA teams look at stats and numbers to make serious analysis and take smart decisions. They can't go around eye testing and thinking things like "Curry is an Kobe wannabe" or "Draymond Green doesn't fit on the Warriors starting lineup".

DAF86

05-28-2017, 10:51 PM

Damn, I just read some of the supidity DMC spoutted. Manu being the 47th best player in the NBA on his prime, him being a Jamal Crowford, Jason Terry level player. :lmao

DMC

05-28-2017, 10:52 PM

By record they were actually the 3rd best team in the NBA.

Anyway, Morey isn't the only guy that would have thrown max money to Manu in today's NBA. Folks that run NBA teams look at stats and numbers to make serious analysis and take smart decisions. They can't go around eye testing and thinking things like "Curry is an Kobe wannabe" or "Draymond Green doesn't fit on the Warriors starting lineup".

You look at a guy 40 years old who's been in the NBA for 15 years as a reserve player and you have to consider that, if he could have been a franchise player on another team he would have. Any team can make any player a franchise player, doesn't mean they would win. Manu couldn't have played starter minutes because his body couldn't handle it. There's a reason he's called El Contusion.

DMC

05-28-2017, 10:54 PM

Damn, I just read some of the supidity DMC spoutted. Manu being the 47th best player in the NBA on his prime, him being a Jamal Crowford, Jason Terry level player. :lmao

Crawford won 6th man 3 times. Manu only once. Andre Iguodala won a Finals MVP. Manu didn't win any. Jason Terry was big for Dallas.

Don't overvalue excitement vs effectiveness.

He was rated 47th by the same media that rated Kobe 12th all time, you seemed ok with that.

DAF86

05-28-2017, 10:59 PM

You look at a guy 40 years old who's been in the NBA for 15 years as a reserve player and you have to consider that, if he could have been a franchise player on another team he would have. Any team can make any player a franchise player, doesn't mean they would win. Manu couldn't have played starter minutes because his body couldn't handle it. There's a reason he's called El Contusion.

That's the only argument that could be made against Manu being a franchise player: the dutability thing, which in my mind is hugely overblown. A guy with durability problems doesn't put together 22 years playing professional basketball, no matter how managed his minutes were, but whatever, I can see why some guys could think that. But in terms of game, playing style, leadership, competitiveness, ability to make teams better, and any other thing related to being a franchise player, there shouldn't be any doubt that Manu could have been a franchise player.

DAF86

05-28-2017, 11:02 PM

DMC

05-28-2017, 11:14 PM

Link?

61 by ESPN on the all time list. 20 spots almost behind Iverson and Allen...

If Manu played starter minutes and mostly against starters, why did he never average 20ppg in any season?

DMC

05-28-2017, 11:16 PM

That's the only argument that could be made against Manu being a franchise player: the dutability thing, which in my mind is hugely overblown. A guy with durability problems doesn't put together 22 years playing professional basketball, no matter how managed his minutes were, but whatever, I can see why some guys could think that. But in terms of game, playing style, leadership, competitiveness, ability to make teams better, and any other thing related to being a franchise player, there shouldn't be any doubt that Manu could have been a franchise player.

Overblown?
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursnation/files/2013/01/12-13ManuInjuries.jpg

DAF86

05-28-2017, 11:16 PM

61 by ESPN on the all time list. 20 spots almost behind Iverson and Allen...

If Manu played starter minutes and mostly against starters, why did he never average 20ppg in any season?

Where's the link that has Manu ranked 47th on his prime?

DAF86

05-28-2017, 11:19 PM

Overblown?
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursnation/files/2013/01/12-13ManuInjuries.jpg

Yeah, overblown. I can show you a pic like that from pretty much everyplayer in the history of the league.

The only season ending injury Manu has had was in 2009.

DMC

05-28-2017, 11:20 PM

Yeah, overblown. I can show you a pic like that from pretty much everyplayer in the history of the league.

The only season ending injury Manu has had was in 2009.

Every poster here knows Manu is the most injury prone player on the Spurs team. Dude lost a testicle this season.

Are you saying it's all a myth?

DAF86

05-28-2017, 11:27 PM

Every poster here knows Manu is the most injury prone player on the Spurs team. Dude lost a testicle this season.

Are you saying it's all a myth?

No, I'm saying is overblwon. In 22 years of career Manu had only one season ending injury. I'm not saying he's immune to injuries, just that his "injury-proness" is overblown. Guys like Grant Hill, Chandler Parsons, Tracy McGrady and Yao Ming, that's what injury prone players trully look like.

spurraider21

05-28-2017, 11:56 PM

Every poster here knows Manu is the most injury prone player on the Spurs team. Dude lost a testicle this season.

Are you saying it's all a myth?
https://cdn.meme.am/cache/instances/folder898/72985898.jpg

spurraider21

05-28-2017, 11:57 PM

being ranked a certain number all time is very different than being ranked in the league at a specific time, even if you lend credence to those rankings

DMC

05-29-2017, 12:03 AM

What are you saying Philo? Are you saying anything? Of course not.

spurraider21

05-29-2017, 12:09 AM

What are you saying Philo? Are you saying anything? Of course not.
my bad, i was under the impression you would understand a comment written in english. here's a recap

you: he was ranked somewhere near 47 in the league during his prime
daf: proof of this ranking?
you: an ESPN list that ranked players from an all time perspective
me: those 2 aren't comparable
you: :cry no stance! :cry

ElNono

05-29-2017, 12:39 AM

Every poster here knows Manu is the most injury prone player on the Spurs team. Dude lost a testicle this season.

Are you saying it's all a myth?

It's overblown, tbh... you could argue he's injury prone from the perspective of limited minutes, but he honestly only didn't play 1 series and 1 game in the playoffs due to injury, IIRC...

Plus a bunch of those 'injuries' on that chart, he played through them. The broken nose against Dallas, he played. The broken arm, he missed 1 game (referenced above), then played through it.

That's one area where DAF is right, if you had to make a chart for Kobe with his sprained ankle, flu, etc, it's two pages or more...

spurraider21

05-29-2017, 12:58 AM

yup, unless you're also willing to call kirby injury prone...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BioEZffCAAAIJwr.png

DMC

05-29-2017, 01:57 AM

my bad, i was under the impression you would understand a comment written in english. here's a recap

you: he was ranked somewhere near 47 in the league during his prime
daf: proof of this ranking?
you: an ESPN list that ranked players from an all time perspective
me: those 2 aren't comparable
you: :cry no stance! :cry

So what did I say to you exactly?

DMC

05-29-2017, 02:17 AM

It's overblown, tbh... you could argue he's injury prone from the perspective of limited minutes, but he honestly only didn't play 1 series and 1 game in the playoffs due to injury, IIRC...

Plus a bunch of those 'injuries' on that chart, he played through them. The broken nose against Dallas, he played. The broken arm, he missed 1 game (referenced above), then played through it.

That's one area where DAF is right, if you had to make a chart for Kobe with his sprained ankle, flu, etc, it's two pages or more...

That's a big "other than" since Kobe played over 48K minutes and Manu played 25.5K minutes.

I never commented about Manu missing games, just that his body couldn't withstand starters minutes (not SA starters where they play 34 a game, but other teams where Manu would have to be the heavy minute guy at 38-42 minutes per game, 82 games a year with no rest on back to backs).

Besides, he did play through injuries but they were still injuries. Manu's playing style, throwing his body out to get charging calls, going through screens, diving through defenses to score, running recklessly down the court through traffic.. all that takes a toll.

But what felt like a sacrifice evolved into something that worked on selfish levels. It capped Ginobili's minutes, preserving his body. San Antonio coaches politely caution that Ginobili's full-throttle style may not have been sustainable under the minutes required for traditional Hall of Fame stats. (Ginobili is a Hall of Fame lock, to be clear.)

"Manu isn't built for heavy starter minutes," said Chip Engelland, a longtime Spurs assistant. "He plays at double speed. If the NBA had a 35-game season, like college, he'd be one of the 10 greatest players ever."

ElNono

05-29-2017, 02:19 AM

yup, unless you're also willing to call kirby injury prone...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BioEZffCAAAIJwr.png

And Kobe was allowed to play with nagging injuries in the regular season. If we had to list every time he played with a wrapped pinky finger, it'd be longer than the lol thread...

Now I do get the argument that if Manu had to play the way he played in his athletic prime, basically a human pinball, for extended minutes it would've been difficult for him. But I think that would've just made his career shorter, not that he didn't have the stamina to deal with it.

After all, he played almost 100+ games a year for most of his career. It's kinda crazy actually, most players take a good chunk of the summer off, but he kept playing for the NT while having long seasons with the Spurs.

ElNono

05-29-2017, 02:24 AM

That's a big "other than" since Kobe played over 48K minutes and Manu played 25.5K minutes.

I never commented about Manu missing games, just that his body couldn't withstand starters minutes (not SA starters where they play 34 a game, but other teams where Manu would have to be the heavy minute guy at 38-42 minutes per game, 82 games a year with no rest on back to backs).

Besides, he did play through injuries but they were still injuries. Manu's playing style, throwing his body out to get charging calls, going through screens, diving through defenses to score, running recklessly down the court through traffic.. all that takes a toll.

But what felt like a sacrifice evolved into something that worked on selfish levels. It capped Ginobili's minutes, preserving his body. San Antonio coaches politely caution that Ginobili's full-throttle style may not have been sustainable under the minutes required for traditional Hall of Fame stats. (Ginobili is a Hall of Fame lock, to be clear.)

"Manu isn't built for heavy starter minutes," said Chip Engelland, a longtime Spurs assistant. "He plays at double speed. If the NBA had a 35-game season, like college, he'd be one of the 10 greatest players ever."

See my previous post. I get that argument that if he had to play with 'reckless abandon' he would've lasted less. There's no way to prove one way or another, but I feel he did have the stamina at that age, his career would've been much shorter though.

I'm just saying the injury prone thing is overblown. If you ask anybody if they thought he would last this long considering his style of play when he was younger, there no way they would've say yes. But in hindsight, he had more freak injuries and played for a coach that had no qualms pulling people if they had a nagging thing. But he played through a lot of those things, especially in the playoffs. Heck, IIRC, Manu right now missed less playoff games due to injury than Tony Parker, and I don't recall anybody advancing that Tony is injury prone.

ElNono

05-29-2017, 02:40 AM

BTW, Kobe played about 56K mins, while Manu played about 31K, when you combine regular season + playoffs. Obviously, Kobe played 5 more seasons. Adjusting Manu's minutes for that would put him around 40K mins, a sizeable difference.

Notably, however, Manu played about the same amount of playoffs games (213 vs 220) in 5 less seasons.

spurraider21

05-29-2017, 02:47 AM

DMC

05-29-2017, 12:09 PM

See my previous post. I get that argument that if he had to play with 'reckless abandon' he would've lasted less. There's no way to prove one way or another, but I feel he did have the stamina at that age, his career would've been much shorter though.

I'm just saying the injury prone thing is overblown. If you ask anybody if they thought he would last this long considering his style of play when he was younger, there no way they would've say yes. But in hindsight, he had more freak injuries and played for a coach that had no qualms pulling people if they had a nagging thing. But he played through a lot of those things, especially in the playoffs. Heck, IIRC, Manu right now missed less playoff games due to injury than Tony Parker, and I don't recall anybody advancing that Tony is injury prone.

BTW, Kobe played about 56K mins, while Manu played about 31K, when you combine regular season + playoffs. Obviously, Kobe played 5 more seasons. Adjusting Manu's minutes for that would put him around 40K mins, a sizeable difference.

Notably, however, Manu played about the same amount of playoffs games (213 vs 220) in 5 less seasons.

Again, I never mentioned missing games.

If someone here wants to forward the idea that Manu was as good as Antawn Jamison, go ahead... if you think Antawn Jamison is a franchise level player. The Spurs trainers said Manu couldn't take heavy minutes for extended periods. Why would you want a franchise to build around a guy who wasn't going to be able to go those minutes? Would Manu be just as good if he played at a lower gear, like Harden? Is he going to anchor the defense or be the guy who carries the team night after night on offense, or both like Kawhi?

Or did the Spurs staff have that take because it justified them bringing him off the bench for all those years?

I think some here are thinking Bucks/Sixers level franchise where you can put a guy there and he can thrive even if the team doesn't. So I already said you can make anyone your franchise player.

DMC

05-29-2017, 12:13 PM

that also doesn't take overseas minutes into consideration, tbh...

Moot point unless you think he wouldn't have played for Argentina if he was a franchise player on another team. Those minutes are the same either way otherwise, and exist on both sides of the equation so they can be eliminated.

spurraider21

05-29-2017, 12:41 PM

Moot point unless you think he wouldn't have played for Argentina if he was a franchise player on another team. Those minutes are the same either way otherwise, and exist on both sides of the equation so they can be eliminated.it's not moot when limiting to the context of his durability, which if you had any sense of context, would have understood it was addressing

DMC

05-29-2017, 12:51 PM

it's not moot when limiting to the context of his durability, which if you had any sense of context, would have understood it was addressing

If I was using his minutes in a vacuum, without comparison to another player, then sure. But those overseas minutes hurt your case, they don't help it. If the Spurs staff is saying Manu cannot handle starter level minutes for years, then they are considering all aspects of why that is the case. I suppose we should factor in practice minutes as well. We don't because it's assumed that those things are a constant, on both sides of the equation, so they cancel out.

spurraider21

05-29-2017, 12:58 PM

If I was using his minutes in a vacuum, without comparison to another player, then sure. But those overseas minutes hurt your case, they don't help it. If the Spurs staff is saying Manu cannot handle starter level minutes for years, then they are considering all aspects of why that is the case. I suppose we should factor in practice minutes as well. We don't because it's assumed that those things are a constant, on both sides of the equation, so they cancel out.yeah i forgot about kobe's career in argentina and italy

DMC

05-29-2017, 02:04 PM

yeah i forgot about kobe's career in argentina and italy

You're not comparing Kobe to Manu. You're comparing bench Manu in SA to franchise Manu elsewhere. The Kobe angle is just a red herring.

So

SA Manu = all foreign play minutes + bench minutes
Elsewhere Manu = all foreign play minutes + starter role minutes (franchise player level starter role)

So cancel out the "all foreign play minutes" and the only comparison should be bench minutes vs starter role minutes. Manu's summer minutes would actually take away from his effectiveness as a franchise player on another team, they wouldn't prove he could do it.

spurraider21

05-29-2017, 02:19 PM

You're not comparing Kobe to Manu. You're comparing bench Manu in SA to franchise Manu elsewhere. The Kobe angle is just a red herring.

So

SA Manu = all foreign play minutes + bench minutes
Elsewhere Manu = all foreign play minutes + starter role minutes (franchise player level starter role)

So cancel out the "all foreign play minutes" and the only comparison should be bench minutes vs starter role minutes. Manu's summer minutes would actually take away from his effectiveness as a franchise player on another team, they wouldn't prove he could do it.the kobe angle was brought up to talk about manu's overblown durability concerns. keep up.

DMC

05-29-2017, 02:22 PM

the kobe angle was brought up to talk about manu's overblown durability concerns. keep up.

Manu isn't Kobe. Odd that Chip Engelland didn't use the Kobe angle.

spurraider21

05-29-2017, 02:27 PM

Manu isn't Kobe. Odd that Chip Engelland didn't use the Kobe angle.good for chip engelland

DMC

05-29-2017, 02:35 PM

good for chip engelland

You're just one passive aggressive utterance after another. Your parents must really enjoy your company.

spurraider21

05-29-2017, 02:47 PM

You're just one passive aggressive utterance after another. Your parents must really enjoy your company.no, you're just being dense. the claim was made that ginobili's injury-proneness was overblown. you responded with a graphic showing manu's injury history. i agreed with the position that his durability concerns are overblown, and responded with a similar graphic for kobe, who is not generally considered injury prone.

YOU then brought up the minutes disparity between kobe and manu, and i added that manu's minutes from playing overseas should factor in as well, since he played professionally for a few years before joining the NBA, whereas kobe didn't. you then called manu's overseas minutes moot. i disagreed. you then called the kobe discussion a red herring, even though YOU'RE the one who first brought up kobe's career minutes :lol

now you're just getting pissy and resorting to your typical defense mechanism of ":cry you're not taking a stance! :cry"

DMC

05-29-2017, 02:50 PM

blah blah blah emoji emoji blah blah blah"

"Manu isn't built for heavy starter minutes," said Chip Engelland, a longtime Spurs assistant.

So you know Manu better than his own trainer?

Mark Celibate

05-29-2017, 04:07 PM

Implying Manu wasn't given main guy defensive attention by opponents when he was the Spurs closer for years. :lol

Folks were like "yeah, we know the game is on the line and Ginobili is probably going to get the ball, but we are not going to guard him that much 'cause, tecnically, he isn't the franchise guy" :lol:lol:lol

I thought mainstream, vanilla, stupid ass takes like this had died out, but apparently there's still a lot of retards out there.

You're a special kind of dense.

He said Manu would struggle if his minutes/role weren't controlled and if he had to deal with being the focal point of defensive attention for 35 minutes a night. Pointing out that he excelled as the closer isn't exactly dispelling that take

lefty20

05-29-2017, 04:23 PM

"Manu isn't built for heavy starter minutes," said Chip Engelland, a longtime Spurs assistant.

So you know Manu better than his own trainer?

Don't think he meant that Manu doesn't have the stamina for it. Sounds like he's saying that Manu playing heavy minutes meant he'd have dieded by now. Which is exactly what a few of us have been saying as well.

DMC

05-29-2017, 04:34 PM

Don't think he meant that Manu doesn't have the stamina for it. Sounds like he's saying that Manu playing heavy minutes meant he'd have dieded by now. Which is exactly what a few of us have been saying as well.

Which is what I was saying. Other than your use of the word above, the word "stamina" was only mentioned twice in this thread, both times by El Nono.

DMC

05-29-2017, 04:35 PM

ElNono

05-29-2017, 05:19 PM

Again, I never mentioned missing games.

If someone here wants to forward the idea that Manu was as good as Antawn Jamison, go ahead... if you think Antawn Jamison is a franchise level player. The Spurs trainers said Manu couldn't take heavy minutes for extended periods. Why would you want a franchise to build around a guy who wasn't going to be able to go those minutes? Would Manu be just as good if he played at a lower gear, like Harden? Is he going to anchor the defense or be the guy who carries the team night after night on offense, or both like Kawhi?

Or did the Spurs staff have that take because it justified them bringing him off the bench for all those years?

I think some here are thinking Bucks/Sixers level franchise where you can put a guy there and he can thrive even if the team doesn't. So I already said you can make anyone your franchise player.

I like Chip, that's his educated opinion, even though he's a shooting coach, not a physical trainer, tbh...

My reasoning of why I disagree with that take is that he's played 35+ mpg in the NT, sometimes back to back and sometimes 3 games in 4 days in his prime, and he performed. When he had coaches that didn't think he needed his minutes limited, and played him many mins, he did so and at a high level. Now, some people might say that wouldn't translate to the NBA, and I have no way to argue that one way or another, so that's fine. But the sample I've seen tells me he was a fine player with a lot of mins (again, in his physical prime, around 2005).

Clipper Nation

05-29-2017, 05:35 PM

Crawford won 6th man 3 times. Manu only once. Andre Iguodala won a Finals MVP. Manu didn't win any. Jason Terry was big for Dallas.

Don't overvalue excitement vs effectiveness.

He was rated 47th by the same media that rated Kobe 12th all time, you seemed ok with that.
Jamal winning the 6th Man award three times just shows how much of a joke the award is. It's ironic that you accuse DAF of valuing excitement over effectiveness and then go to bat for Jamal. Jamal is the ultimate "excitement over effectiveness" player. Before he got too old and completely went to shit, he could pad stats in the regular season, he could dazzle crowds with his AND1 dribble moves, but he was still a terrible basketball player. Awful shot selection, no defense, no rebounding, won't pass the ball.

Never mind prime Manu or prime Jamal. The Clippers would be a better team right now with a 39-year-old Manu instead of Jamal.

DMC

05-29-2017, 06:31 PM

Jamal winning the 6th Man award three times just shows how much of a joke the award is. It's ironic that you accuse DAF of valuing excitement over effectiveness and then go to bat for Jamal. Jamal is the ultimate "excitement over effectiveness" player. Before he got too old and completely went to shit, he could pad stats in the regular season, he could dazzle crowds with his AND1 dribble moves, but he was still a terrible basketball player. Awful shot selection, no defense, no rebounding, won't pass the ball.

Never mind prime Manu or prime Jamal. The Clippers would be a better team right now with a 39-year-old Manu instead of Jamal.

Was prime Manu better than Chris Paul?

DAF86

05-29-2017, 07:31 PM

You're a special kind of dense.

He said Manu would struggle if his minutes/role weren't controlled and if he had to deal with being the focal point of defensive attention for 35 minutes a night. Pointing out that he excelled as the closer isn't exactly dispelling that take

No, he said:

Unlikely. He was effective because he was skilled but just as important because his minutes were carefully controlled and limited. Put him out there for 35 minutes a night like a franchise player and he wouldn't be the same player. As a franchise guy who is the focal point of an opposing defense he would also struggle against the double and triple teams the franchise players get.

That "also" there implies that the "he would struggle against the double and triple teams a franchise player gets" argument is a different and separate argument from the "minutes/role" one.

DMC

05-29-2017, 08:39 PM

No, he said:

That "also" there implies that the "he would struggle against the double and triple teams a franchise player gets" argument is a different and separate argument from the "minutes/role" one.
"as a franchise guy..." denotes heavy minutes.

Don't be a douchebag, Balky.

DAF86

05-29-2017, 09:13 PM

"as a franchise guy..." denotes heavy minutes.

Don't be a douchebag, Balky.

The "heavy load/minutes" thing had already been adressed, him adding an "also" after that shifts the topic of the argument into another direction: "the struggle of double and triples teams", which is further explicited by the addition of the bit: "the franchise players get", at the end; implying that franchise players get double and triple teams that second and third options don't.

DMC

05-29-2017, 10:35 PM

The "heavy load/minutes" thing had already been adressed, him adding an "also" after that shifts the topic of the argument into another direction: "the struggle of double and triples teams", which is further explicited by the addition of the bit: "the franchise players get", at the end; implying that franchise players get double and triple teams that second and third options don't.

No, dippy. The two parts of the statement are connected by "also" so it means he'd face those for heavy minutes, not just end of game situations where Tim Duncan is still on the floor.

DAF86

05-29-2017, 10:53 PM

No, dippy. The two parts of the statement are connected by "also" so it means he'd face those for heavy minutes, not just end of game situations where Tim Duncan is still on the floor.

Whatever son, I'm not gonna keep arguing about this shit with a guy that gets a pathological hard-on from spinning, twisting and squeezing internet arguments just to have the last word. To me it's pretty clear what he said, if he meant another thing he should have phrased it differently. Take it from a guy that spent more than 10 years of his life studying every little subtle grammatical aspect of the English language (I know you won't, and will have something else to say, but whatever :lol).

DMC

05-29-2017, 10:58 PM

Whatever son, I'm not gonna keep arguing about this shit with a guy that gets a pathological hard-on from spinning, twisting and squeezing internet arguments just to have the last word. To me it's pretty clear what he said, if he meant another thing he should have phrased it differently. Take it from a guy that spent more than 10 years of his life studying every little subtle grammatical aspect of the English language.

Take it from a guy that spent his entire life speaking it. That's what he meant.

DAF86

05-29-2017, 11:27 PM

DMC

05-30-2017, 04:46 PM

Speaking a language your entire life doesn't mean you know more about it than a guy that studied it at college level (in fact, most times it's the other way around, tbh), it just means that you are more fluent at speaking it. I bet I can name you more than a couple concepts, about the English language, that you never even heard of, tbh. Unless, that is, you are a student of the language too, in which case I stand corrected.

I don't give a fuck if you taught it at Harvard, you didn't understand what was being said in the paragraph you quoted.

A. More minutes

ALSO

B. heavier defense

You think A and B are exclusive of each other but they aren't. You used "also" to create that narrative in your head.

DAF86

05-30-2017, 08:57 PM

Dumb motherfucker :lol

apalisoc_9

05-30-2017, 09:17 PM

DMC

05-30-2017, 11:25 PM

DMC is fat and has admitted he has never touched any basketball in his life. He's an edgy poster with an extremely low understanding of the game as is the case with most 300 obese Americans.

Manu would have been fine. Is he a franchise player at the level of Durant, Kawhi, lebron etc? A player that carries their team night in and night out..probably not.

But he was a third team all nba level player. He could be the best player of a team that finishes top 6 in the west provided he has the right personel.

Lowlifes should stop limiting the term franchise to players to players that can turn a team into championship caliber..

There's only maybe 4 players in the league that make that claim.

You build a team around a franchise player. You don't ask him to come off the bench.

Manu would have been fine starting his entire career as part of the big 3. A team with Manu as the best player of a big 3 wouldn't have been a very good team, but it could have been done. The fact nobody did it tells me it wasn't a desireable thing to do. You could make JJ Barea a franchise player if you wanted to build around him. You'd be stupid, but you could do it.

Imagine Manu as the best player on the Spurs team for 10 years. How many playoff appearances do they have?

Imagine Manu doesn't re-up after his 1st contract is up and he goes to some team like the Bucks. They decide to build around him. Was he better than Michael Redd was during that time? Who do they put around Manu to make an effective team?

So no, he could have been a starter on any team in the league, probably a top 3 player on almost any team, but not a centerpiece.

/thread

DAF86

05-31-2017, 12:32 AM

Calling "/thread" after your own post. Is there anything lamer than that? :lol

Also: "Is Manu a better player than Michael Redd?" :lmao

spurraider21

05-31-2017, 12:36 AM

Manu was a franchise player in SA. The bench was built around him constantly.

You build a team around a franchise player. You don't ask him to come off the bench.
http://www.johnlocke.org/site-docs/lockerroom/movinggoalpost.gif

140

05-31-2017, 06:13 AM

:lol

DMC

05-31-2017, 08:32 AM

http://www.johnlocke.org/site-docs/lockerroom/movinggoalpost.gif

Bench /= team Philo

Surely a lawyer recognizes that.

Manu being part of the big 3 doesn't mean he's the franchise guy. Nice try Philobtuse

DMC

05-31-2017, 08:41 AM

Calling "/thread" after your own post. Is there anything lamer than that? :lol

Also: "Is Manu a better player than Michael Redd?" :lmao

Actually I said "Was he better than Michael Redd during that time?"

:lol 10 years studying the English language and cannot quote accurately

Redd

http://i.imgur.com/wWNXdm9.jpg

Ginobili

http://i.imgur.com/ynvcNKR.jpg

What point in time here would Manu have gone to the Bucks and been more productive than Redd? Would he have been franchise player level quality during that time?

Then realize we are comparing Manu to Michael fucking Redd and you still cannot find an opening.

DAF86

05-31-2017, 03:01 PM

Actually I said "Was he better than Michael Redd during that time?"

:lol 10 years studying the English language and cannot quote accurately

Redd

http://i.imgur.com/wWNXdm9.jpg

Ginobili

http://i.imgur.com/ynvcNKR.jpg

What point in time here would Manu have gone to the Bucks and been more productive than Redd? Would he have been franchise player level quality during that time?

Then realize we are comparing Manu to Michael fucking Redd and you still cannot find an opening.

"Can't find an opening" :lol

Why are you comparing stats? The whole fucking premise of the thread is that Manu would have got much more eye popping raw stats if he had the chance to go be the number one option of a team, so I don't get the point of comparing the stats that occurred without Manu having that chance.

And if you can't tell by simple eye sighting that Manu Ginobili is a better player than Michael Redd ever was, then I now realize why you are one of the few dumbasses arguing on this thread, tbh. :lol

DMC

05-31-2017, 03:15 PM

"Can't find an opening" :lol

Why are you comparing stats? The whole fucking premise of the thread is that Manu would have got much more eye popping raw stats if he had the chance to go be the number one option of a team, so I don't get the point of comparing the stats that occurred without Manu having that chance.

And if you can't tell by simple eye sighting that Manu Ginobili is a better player than Michael Redd ever was, then I now realize why you are one of the few dumbasses arguing on this thread, tbh. :lol

1. Who said Manu didn't have that chance?
2. I don't rely on the eyeball test

The Bucks let Ray Allen go because Michael Redd was their up and coming franchise guy.

You're also arguing on it - dumbass.

DAF86

05-31-2017, 03:17 PM

1. Who said Manu didn't have that chance?
2. I don't rely on the eyeball test

The Bucks let Ray Allen go because Michael Redd was their up and coming franchise guy.

You're also arguing on it - dumbass.

So, who's better: Manu or Michael Redd?

DMC

05-31-2017, 03:21 PM

So, who's better: Manu or Michael Redd?

Your countryman was where he needed to be, where all your fellow countrymen need to be: a clean up guy, there on the bench waiting for the old white man to tell him the show is over, go clean the fucking office... but :cry much countrymen could have been more.. :cry sacrifice :cry GOAT 2nd tier player

DAF86

05-31-2017, 04:00 PM

Your countryman was where he needed to be, where all your fellow countrymen need to be: a clean up guy, there on the bench waiting for the old white man to tell him the show is over, go clean the fucking office... but :cry much countrymen could have been more.. :cry sacrifice :cry GOAT 2nd tier player

Who was the better player: Manu or Redd? It's a pretty simple question, tbh.

unleashbaynes

05-31-2017, 04:06 PM

How can somebody's hand be so fat after typing all of these words, tbh?

Clipper Nation

05-31-2017, 04:30 PM

How can somebody's hand be so fat after typing all of these words, tbh?
They're probably swollen from carpal tunnel in addition to just being fat, tbh :lol

DMC

05-31-2017, 05:27 PM

Who was the better player: Manu or Redd? It's a pretty simple question, tbh.

I don't dance, forum monkey.

Answer my question first. Which franchise player in the NBA could Manu have replaced and been better at the position? Why did Chip say Manu wasn't built for starter minutes yet you think he was? Did you sleep with him?

DMC

05-31-2017, 05:29 PM

They're probably swollen from carpal tunnel in addition to just being fat, tbh :lol

How can somebody's hand be so fat after typing all of these words, tbh?

^Turd Twins

FkLA

05-31-2017, 07:44 PM

Fat boy is by far the most annoying poster to have an argument with, tbh.

DMC

05-31-2017, 07:57 PM

Fat boy is by far the most annoying poster to have an argument with, tbh.

:lol runs with fat schtick
:lol refuses to bet on it "I might be wrong"
:lol follows me around anyhow
:lol UTSA

FkLA

05-31-2017, 10:06 PM

apalisoc_9

05-31-2017, 10:27 PM

You're fat. No amount of money will help you shed that label or weight. I also don't have to follow you around. You have 60k posts. You're in every thread. Keep chalking up those Ws and showing everyone how much smarter you are though:

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/526/891/d0e.jpg

I remeber he was a new poster in around 2012...Always telling me I have no life because I have close to 10k post. I'm now around 18k and this fat nikka is a year away from 100k post :lol

diego

05-31-2017, 11:26 PM

if manu is more effective in limited minutes than most players, why does he need to play 40 minutes a night?
pippen played the same amount of minutes with MJ than without. same for kobe with shaq. their rank on the team heirarchy didnt change their minutes. do you not consider them franchise players? they were sidekicks because they had teammates that were better, just like manu.
if player a goes 20/5/5 in 30 minutes and player b does it in 36, why is player b better? sure, if manu could play 36 minutes and produce at the same rate, like Engelland said in your quote, he'd be top 10 all time. he can settle for 47 or even top 75, you're being an obtuse idiot if you think a top 75 all time player isnt worthy of the "franchise player" tag. manu's advanced stats put him closer to the 20-40 range than the 50-75 one anyway.

as for durability... manu got injured a lot on collisions and accidents, but he didnt have chronic knee / ankle /bone problems like most guys who are called injury prone do and that is the reason he played up to 40. Who was more durable, the guy that played less minutes into his 40s or the guy who played big minutes and had to retire 8 years earlier? Its funny you mention redd, a forgotten "franchise player" who retired with nothing but one all star game and one all nba, vs an icon like manu with more accolades both team and individual. Im VERY interested to see what happens with kawhi and how spurs fans on this board label him. since he doesnt have the big 3 anymore hell have to carry a load that none of them had to do, and he has already exhibited certain propensity for both chronic and accidental injuries. players like paul pierce, allen, joe johnson, aldridge, franchise guys that play big minutes but are finesse fucking pussies are not comparable to ballers that play hard. its easier to play big minutes if you are holding back half your time on the floor. anyways you clearly consider kawhi a franchise player... FYI, he's never played more than 33 minutes, never played more than 74 games a season. 90% of nba players have injury problems so this shouldnt be a surprise to anyone that most players get injured and a big part of jordan and lebrons success is health. you're talking about the top percentile of players ever, everyone else got injured and missed playoffs and seasons and became different players etc etc, including tim, kobe, garnett, dirk, nash, paul, shaq etc etc. Having come off the bench, manu's status is diminished, only die hard fans like me will consider them his peers. at the least he was right there behind them, and you're nuts if you dont think he could have been a franchise level player for a playoff team for at least a 2 year stretch. go back and watch the spurs upset the mavs in 2010 despite dirk breaking manu's nose and najera taking shots at him, and tell me who the spurs franchise player was. people call manu's 2011 spurs a paper tiger because they lost to the grizzlies, what does that make dirk's 2007 mavs? 99% of those big minutes guys that dont get injured are offense only softies and not even they are guaranteed to stay safe.

You build a team around a franchise player. You don't ask him to come off the bench.

what if you already have a franchise player, a top 10 all time one to boot?

finally, the bench thing. why are we pretending that manu wasnt a starter for several seasons? Notably, in 2005 (closer for a champion, albeit with a goat player taking the spotlight), and in 2011, when said goat player was readjusting his game due to age, injury and changes in the league. Manu had better stats starting than coming off the bench (which is probably true for all players, the myth that starters stats suffer because of quality of opponents is ridiculous), and in my opinion he was the franchise player for the 2010 and 2011 spurs (he was better just slightly better than duncan then, lead the team in mvp shares both years, finished 8th in 2011). You could argue that proves, his durability punished the team (terrible string of playoff injuries, ankle in 08, aggravated ankle injury in 09, nose 2010, arm 2011, though he did play through those last two admirably), but at the same time it shows he could have been a franchise player easily. Maybe not a conventional one. maybe not a top ten all time one. but enough to be in the top 12 teams at the end of any given season, yes.

ambchang

06-01-2017, 09:11 AM

Depends what you mean by franchise player, really.

If by franchise player you mean a franchise player for a championship team, then probably not, as there are top 20 players of all time who couldn't do that.

But by franchise player as in Michael Redd, James Harden, Allen Iverson, Ray Allen, or Michael Redd levels? Sure, he has shown the ability to lead teams to decent records and some post season success as the main offensive guy. Put him with a rugged rebounder/defender and a bunch of shooters, and he can play like a Nash-lite on offense and much better on defense in :lol today's NBA. He may even be the face of a 50-win team.

He made All-NBA third team twice, and was top 11 in MVP award shares 3 times in his career, so those are indications that he can at least be a top level player in the league.

As for injury concerns, he has played 992 out of 1214 possible games in his career. Sure that is not iron man level of reliability, but that's still a good 82% of games, and that includes games where he was strategically rested.

He typically plays around 65 to 75 games a year early on in his career, so while this isn't great, it's not horrible.

Mark Celibate

06-01-2017, 11:54 AM

DMC is fat and has admitted he has never touched any basketball in his life. He's an edgy poster with an extremely low understanding of the game as is the case with most 300 obese Americans.

Manu would have been fine. Is he a franchise player at the level of Durant, Kawhi, lebron etc? A player that carries their team night in and night out..probably not.

But he was a third team all nba level player. He could be the best player of a team that finishes top 6 in the west provided he has the right personel.

Lowlifes should stop limiting the term franchise to players to players that can turn a team into championship caliber..

There's only maybe 4 players in the league that make that claim.

If anybody gives a shit about my opinion, this is probably what I'd agree with although I'm thinking 7th/8th seed in the West but in the East much higher (although second round ceiling). Something along those lines.

Manu is an all around damn good player with a great basketball IQ. My problem with Ginobili is that he doesn't have the freak athleticism or signature move that would consistently get him the 20 ppg or lead his team deep into the playoffs. He seems like he wouldn't be that difficult to shut down in the playoffs.

-Kawhi is 6'8 and freakishly athletic
-Durant is a 7 foot guard
-Dirk has the unstoppable fadeaway
-Shaq just overpowered people
-Kobe/Duncan were just scoring machines
-Curry with the lightning quick release from anywhere on the court

etc

Ginobili, to me, doesn't have that type of game to where he can just go to his signature move that can't be stopped even when other guys know it's coming. That's what would keep him at a tier below those other guys as franchise players, IMO. Of course, this is all speculative and Manu's a touchy subject with certain posters on this forum so there's no point in getting into a back and forth pissing match

DAF86

06-01-2017, 02:06 PM

If anybody gives a shit about my opinion, this is probably what I'd agree with although I'm thinking 7th/8th seed in the West but in the East much higher (although second round ceiling). Something along those lines.

Manu is an all around damn good player with a great basketball IQ. My problem with Ginobili is that he doesn't have the freak athleticism or signature move that would consistently get him the 20 ppg or lead his team deep into the playoffs. He seems like he wouldn't be that difficult to shut down in the playoffs.

-Kawhi is 6'8 and freakishly athletic
-Durant is a 7 foot guard
-Dirk has the unstoppable fadeaway
-Shaq just overpowered people
-Kobe/Duncan were just scoring machines
-Curry with the lightning quick release from anywhere on the court

etc

Ginobili, to me, doesn't have that type of game to where he can just go to his signature move that can't be stopped even when other guys know it's coming. That's what would keep him at a tier below those other guys as franchise players, IMO. Of course, this is all speculative and Manu's a touchy subject with certain posters on this forum so there's no point in getting into a back and forth pissing match

That's a strange argument regarding Manu when this year he won NBA TV's "Best go to move in history", by a landslide, with his eurostep. I think he beat Jabbar's sky hook like 70/30, in the final.

Also, Manu on his prime was deceptively atheltic, he's more athletic than a guy like Harden, for example. Just go look at some of Manu's best dunks and blocks and compare it to Hardens.

When I made this thread I looked at Harden. To me it's obvious Manu could have had the same success Harden has had as a Franchise player, since Harden is basically Manu minus the clutchness, competitiveness spirit and the defensive effort. So, I agree with you that not a 1st tier franchise player, but I think he could have done better than just 7th or 8th seed on the West.

DAF86

06-01-2017, 02:11 PM

I don't dance, forum monkey.

Answer my question first. Which franchise player in the NBA could Manu have replaced and been better at the position? Why did Chip say Manu wasn't built for starter minutes yet you think he was? Did you sleep with him?

I have already answered that question. Manu could have been the Franchise player in more than half of the NBA teams (probably even in 3/4th of the teams).

Now, answer my question: Who was the better NBA player, Manu Ginobili or Michael Redd?

ambchang

06-01-2017, 03:32 PM

That's a strange argument regarding Manu when this year he won NBA TV's "Best go to move in history", by a landslide, with his eurostep. I think he beat Jabbar's sky hook like 70/30, in the final.

Also, Manu on his prime was deceptively atheltic, he's more athletic than a guy like Harden, for example. Just go look at some of Manu's best dunks and blocks and compare it to Hardens.

When I made this thread I looked at Harden. To me it's obvious Manu could have had the same success Harden has had as a Franchise player, since Harden is basically Manu minus the clutchness, competitiveness spirit and the defensive effort. So, I agree with you that not a 1st tier franchise player, but I think he could have done better than just 7th or 8th seed on the West.

I think Manu's athleticism is underrated. He isn't the highest jumper, but his agility, ability to change directions, control of speed and eye-hand coordination is all elite.

I think Manu as a franchise player would be like a healthy Brandon Roy, good stats (not ridiculous like Lebron), deceptively good athletically, and can lead the team to surprisingly good standings.

DMC

06-01-2017, 05:28 PM

I have already answered that question. Manu could have been the Franchise player in more than half of the NBA teams (probably even in 3/4th of the teams).

Now, answer my question: Who was the better NBA player, Manu Ginobili or Michael Redd?

I told you I don't dance for you.

There are only a handful of real franchise players in the NBA. These are people you can build your franchise around for the foreseeable future and have good success. I don't think an organization as savvy as the Spurs took a guy who would fit that bill and put him as a 6th man for years. I trust Pop's IQ and decision making more than that. It doesn't mean Manu wasn't a great player, but some of you are narrowing down to a fine point and altering the meaning of the term "franchise player".

If you consider that Tim was the cog on the Spurs, then Manu was the cog off the bench. So in that sense Manu was a franchise player since the bench was consistently built with up-tempo offense that suits Manu's playing style. It's not the same (philo) to say he was part of the franchise big 3 and to say he could have been THE franchise guy on another team.

Could Manu have been the best player on a good team? Sure.

spurraider21

06-01-2017, 05:40 PM

:lol michael redd
:cry no stance, passive aggressive

DMC

06-01-2017, 06:35 PM

:lol michael redd
:cry no stance, passive aggressive

Redd

http://i.imgur.com/wWNXdm9.jpg

Ginobili

http://i.imgur.com/ynvcNKR.jpg

Phil:lol

spurraider21

06-01-2017, 06:41 PM

So is Michael Redd a better player than Manu?

DMC

06-01-2017, 06:43 PM

So is Michael Redd a better player than Manu?

Philo lapdogging DAF...

:lol

spurraider21

06-01-2017, 06:45 PM

Philo lapdogging DAF...

:lol
:cry no stance on redd vs manu

DMC

06-01-2017, 07:23 PM

:lol no, we were discussing your claim that he was injury prone in his prime. He wasn't. He played more games in his first 6 seasons than your average NBA player.

That's all. Already said I didn't think he could've been a franchise player... I just think the injury prone card gets thrown around without much basis... later in his career? maybe. But in his prime he was pretty healthy.

Manu himself said he wouldn't have been able to handle big minutes consistently, so even he knows his durability couldn't sustain the type of heavy lifting required to be the man every night for the vast majority of his career.

No, he couldn't have. I get that he's a local hero so Argentinians support him more than a German with a questionable past, but the fact is he was extremely lucky to play in a great system with great players and coach.

No he couldn't have.

1. Too injury prone in his prime (not an overblown fact).

2. Body is not built sturdy enough for his style of play, which is why he was so injury prone and why his minutes were watched.

3. Gets gassed when required to play 35 or more minutes.

4. No post game, which is an important weapon a (franchise) perimeter player has needed since Jordan redefined the position in that regard.

:cry no stance on redd vs manu

:lol

Even Manu's agent and Manu himself agrees with me.

Barfunk

06-01-2017, 08:51 PM

Not better than Michael Redd? Not better than Steve Nash? A Jamal Crawford level basketball player? Unbelievable. I can't feel my legs.

spurraider21

06-01-2017, 08:56 PM

:lol

Even Manu's agent and Manu himself agrees with me.
argumentum ad populum

DMC

06-01-2017, 10:01 PM

argumentum ad populum

Actually that would be appeal to authority.

spurraider21

06-01-2017, 10:02 PM

Actually that would be appeal to authority.
referring to your whole post where you just quoted people from the thread. they aren't authority

DMC

06-01-2017, 10:37 PM

referring to your whole post where you just quoted people from the thread. they aren't authority

That's not what you quoted.

spurraider21

06-01-2017, 10:50 PM

That's not what you quoted.
i quoted this post... but ST doesn't automatically include quotes within quotes

https://i.gyazo.com/09ce0df2ba8cdf113d75f9cfe62df62a.png

DMC

06-01-2017, 10:52 PM

Exactly... Manu and Manu's agent.

That's what I said. The rest is just there for reference. Else I would have said all these people agree with me.

DAF86

06-01-2017, 10:57 PM

Exactly... Manu and Manu's agent.

That's what I said. The rest is just there for reference. Else I would have said all these people agree with me.

Except you are lying. Manu never said he couldn't have been a frsnchise player, in fact, quite the opposite. I'm pretty sure Manu thinks he could lead a team to a championships. He has a winning mentality and is competitive like that.

DMC

06-01-2017, 11:04 PM

Except you are lying. Manu never said he couldn't have been a frsnchise player, in fact, quite the opposite. I'm pretty sure Manu thinks he could lead a team to a championships. He has a winning mentality and is competitive like that.

Tell Spur-addict. Reading comprehension must have been in the 11th year that you missed.

Mitch

06-01-2017, 11:04 PM

Of course the Argie will valiantly defend something like Manu being a franchise level player :lol

DAF86

06-01-2017, 11:07 PM

Tell Spur-addict. Reading comprehension must have been in the 11th year that you missed.

So you are just taking someone's else quote, without even checking it, and using it as proof that "Manu agrees with you"?

Mark Celibate

06-01-2017, 11:15 PM

can't believe people are hating on DET nigga Michael Redd. The guy was nasty for a stretch he just didn't have longevity

DAF86

06-01-2017, 11:20 PM

can't believe people are hating on DET nigga Michael Redd. The guy was nasty for a stretch he just didn't have longevity

What happened to the post you quoted of me son? :lol

Mark Celibate

06-01-2017, 11:37 PM

What happened to the post you quoted of me son? :lol

:lol I wasn't sure if anybody was gonna catch that. I meant to post those two back to back but I accidentally edited/deleted when making the Michael Redd post. I'm tired tbh. I can type it again if you want but I don't think anybody here cares for my take IMHO

DAF86

06-01-2017, 11:51 PM

:lol I wasn't sure if anybody was gonna catch that. I meant to post those two back to back but I accidentally edited/deleted when making the Michael Redd post. I'm tired tbh. I can type it again if you want but I don't think anybody here cares for my take IMHO

I do son. If I didn't care about other people's opinions I wouldn't be posting on an internet forum, tbh.

I promise not to be like DMC and move goal post, shift arguments and bore you to death, tbh.

DMC

06-02-2017, 12:09 AM

Of course the Argie will valiantly defend something like Manu being a franchise level player :lol

I was reading a stats blog/forum where most of the banter was high level, sensible takes on whether or not Manu is a HOFer. Then the place gets flooded with take after take of all caps posters claiming Manu to be a sure lock, and all of them had names like Pitar and Juan and Pablo. :lol

One even said "I'm from Argentina however...", as if they randomly stumbled upon the site. :lol

They are the most easily trolled group on the forum, which is why the fake Parkerstans have been doing it for years. In reality, no one here likes Tony Parker.

Mark Celibate

06-02-2017, 12:12 AM

I do son. If I didn't care about other people's opinions I wouldn't be posting on an internet forum, tbh.

I promise not to be like DMC (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=20665) and move goal post, shift arguments and bore you to death, tbh.

well here it goes then

That's a strange argument regarding Manu when this year he won NBA TV's "Best go to move in history", by a landslide, with his eurostep. I think he beat Jabbar's sky hook like 70/30, in the final.

Also, Manu on his prime was deceptively atheltic, he's more athletic than a guy like Harden, for example. Just go look at some of Manu's best dunks and blocks and compare it to Hardens.

When I made this thread I looked at Harden. To me it's obvious Manu could have had the same success Harden has had as a Franchise player, since Harden is basically Manu minus the clutchness, competitiveness spirit and the defensive effort. So, I agree with you that not a 1st tier franchise player, but I think he could have done better than just 7th or 8th seed on the West.

tbh when I said "signature move" that he can go to time and time again, I meant being a good one on one player. The euro step is not a one-on-one move. To me, the euro step is so famous because it is effective in fast break situations and it was emulated by so many players.

again, it's really a moot argument since we'll never know who's right or who's wrong. It wouldn't surprise me if Ginobili would've been able to alter his game if he knew he had to carry the load since he seems smart enough to do so. However, I'm just going by the eye test on what I actually saw throughout his career.

Mitch

06-02-2017, 12:53 AM

I was reading a stats blog/forum where most of the banter was high level, sensible takes on whether or not Manu is a HOFer. Then the place gets flooded with take after take of all caps posters claiming Manu to be a sure lock, and all of them had names like Pitar and Juan and Pablo. :lol

One even said "I'm from Argentina however...", as if they randomly stumbled upon the site. :lol

They are the most easily trolled group on the forum, which is why the fake Parkerstans have been doing it for years. In reality, no one here likes Tony Parker.

Tbh, when you have little to be proud of coming from your country you cling to sports players and winning a shitty spicball FIFA trophy

DAF86

06-02-2017, 12:57 AM

Whatever happened to "Big Dog", tbh? :lol

DMC

06-02-2017, 01:04 AM

Whatever happened to "Big Dog", tbh? :lol

You mean Philo your lap dog? I think he's licking his balls near your recliner.

DAF86

06-02-2017, 01:25 AM

You mean Philo your lap dog? I think he's licking his balls near your recliner.

We actually fire shots at each other on some issues here,
with spurraider21, but you just have the hability of bringing people together against your goal posting and twisting abilities son. :lol

SpurOutofTownFan

06-03-2017, 09:39 AM

Mediocre player that had the fortune to play next to Timmy and Tony

He would have been a franchise player in Europe

But in the US of A he wouldnt even take the toros to thenplayoffs

I have to call you out on this - you may not like him but he's far from a mediocre player. His record speaks for itself, both in the US and elsewhere. There's only 2 people who have happened to win in Europe, USA, and the Olympics. Manu is one of them.

His Argentina team beat the US with a super team in 2004 and he was the best player in their roster - playing "franchise" minutes

To me Manu's legacy has already been cemented and it cannot be moved, no matter how much people could hate on him. It was done by him, on the basketball court, where you and I don't exist.

ElNono

06-03-2017, 11:07 PM

:lol

Even Manu's agent and Manu himself agrees with me.

tbf, I qualified that opinion on a later post.

Because that was his prime.

I said it in the first post I replied to you: he came to the league late, already blossomed in Europe, his "window" was about 4 years at his peak... that's actually probably the biggest knock to call him a "franchise player".

I would've been intrigued if he came over young, gone to the college game here... I'm sure they would've worked some PEDs on his body. But, we'll never know now.

Like I said, there's a lot of coulda, woulda... he certainly had the talent to be, IMO...

dbreiden83080

06-03-2017, 11:45 PM

He would have been fun to watch on a bad team for sure. Probably a 25 PPG guy but also injury prone. 2005 he was a hell of a player, his best year IMO. Better he had the career he did though. Lots of winning and chips, and still going to the HOF..

DMC

06-04-2017, 01:17 AM

tbf, I qualified that opinion on a later post.

Like I said, there's a lot of coulda, woulda... he certainly had the talent to be, IMO...

I am not sure Manu gets the minutes on another team. Sure, if you took hindsight Manu and made him Prime manu, he's a lock, but he didn't come into the league that way. The fact that every other team in the league passed on him and he went 57th says enough about how other teams viewed what he could do.

So you have to consider 1st year Manu, else you consider he was traded in his prime which I'd buy then that he could be an important part of another team, maybe the best player. His unselfishness though doesn't jive well with typical best player types from that era.

Mikeanaro

06-04-2017, 02:36 AM

Gordon Hayward is a franchise player, D Rose was one for 3 seasons before turning into a walking dead.

ElNono

06-04-2017, 03:44 AM

I am not sure Manu gets the minutes on another team. Sure, if you took hindsight Manu and made him Prime manu, he's a lock, but he didn't come into the league that way. The fact that every other team in the league passed on him and he went 57th says enough about how other teams viewed what he could do.

So you have to consider 1st year Manu, else you consider he was traded in his prime which I'd buy then that he could be an important part of another team, maybe the best player. His unselfishness though doesn't jive well with typical best player types from that era.

I agree if the premise is that he comes over when he came over... the reality is that Manu didn't look all that great 4 years before he got to the Spurs (when he was drafted in 1999), but by 2001 onwards, he was lightning it up in Europe and doing a lot of winning.

That's why I said that if you change the premise to 'he grew up in the US college system', then maybe we'll be looking at this differently. But then you enter the coulda, shoulda I was talking about earlier. Things didn't pan out that way.

DMC

06-04-2017, 12:37 PM

I agree if the premise is that he comes over when he came over... the reality is that Manu didn't look all that great 4 years before he got to the Spurs (when he was drafted in 1999), but by 2001 onwards, he was lightning it up in Europe and doing a lot of winning.

That's why I said that if you change the premise to 'he grew up in the US college system', then maybe we'll be looking at this differently. But then you enter the coulda, shoulda I was talking about earlier. Things didn't pan out that way.

If he grew up in the US college system he'd be a much worse player because he'd not have the freedom to create. He'd be pushed into the AAU program and fall in love with the 3 and isolation basketball. His background is part and parcel of his game. It's why those other Argies were good in the NBA as well as the Brazilians. That type of play is conducive to team ball and good team ball beats good isoball any day. Colleges rarely put out a team baller who makes it in the NBA.

Teams should be sending rookies to Argentina to learn how to play ball. Even the d-league is heroball.

DAF86

04-09-2018, 10:25 PM

What numbers would prime Manu average on today's NBA? Since he isn't a Harden/Westbrook type stat-padder, I think he would average around 22/25 ppg, 7/8 apg and 6/7 rpg. And he would be a top 5/10 player in the league, tbh.

ElNono

04-09-2018, 10:43 PM

Never missed the playoffs in his career, tbh... respect

DAF86

04-09-2018, 10:46 PM

Never missed the playoffs in his career, tbh... respect

And a pretty strong case could be made that without him finishing some close games the team wouldn't have made the playoffs. The difference between making the playoffs or not, at age 40. Crazy, tbh. :lol

ElNono

04-09-2018, 10:54 PM

And a pretty strong case could be made that without him finishing some close games the team wouldn't have made the playoffs. The difference between making the playoffs or not, at age 40. Crazy, tbh. :lol

he definitely a huge reason, like LMA...

ambchang

04-10-2018, 05:36 AM

Already the best shooting guard of his generation.

TDfan2007

04-11-2018, 08:50 AM

Already the best shooting guard of his generation.

:lol no.

I love Manu, but there's no way in hell he's better than Kobe or Wade. Controlling for all other factors, Manu's biggest issue in his career has been an inability to stay healthy, especially during his prime (2005-2011). Still one of the best, and my personal second-favorite Spur ever

Phenomanul

04-11-2018, 01:51 PM

:lol no.

I love Manu, but there's no way in hell he's better than Kobe or Wade. Controlling for all other factors, Manu's biggest issue in his career has been an inability to stay healthy, especially during his prime (2005-2011). Still one of the best, and my personal second-favorite Spur ever

Manu was more efficient than Kobe - and that's not really debateable.

And as was shown in a previous post, Manu's best post-season rivals any post-season produced by either Wade or Kobe. Ginobili was never a chucker - not even on his Argie or European teams.

Does that mean he was better than those two? It's all subjective and in most people's minds they "led" their teams to Championships... which "automatically" makes them better in their eyes...

What I'm trying to say here is that the difference between Manu and Kobe/Wade is not as wide as people seem to think.

DAF86

04-11-2018, 02:25 PM

Jordan, Kobe and maybe Wade. Those are the only SGs I've seen who are better than Manu. Not Iverson, not Reggie Miller, not Ray Allen, nor any other SG from the modern era.

TDfan2007

04-12-2018, 12:06 AM

Manu was more efficient than Kobe - and that's not really debateable.

And as was shown in a previous post, Manu's best post-season rivals any post-season produced by either Wade or Kobe. Ginobili was never a chucker - not even on his Argie or European teams.

Does that mean he was better than those two? It's all subjective and in most people's minds they "led" their teams to Championships... which "automatically" makes them better in their eyes...

What I'm trying to say here is that the difference between Manu and Kobe/Wade is not as wide as people seem to think.

Manu never had a season with a PER over 25. Kobe and Wade had several. Further, aside from 2005 and 2014, Manu's efficiency took a dive every year in the playoffs. As the minutes went up, his effectiveness decreased.

So yeah, I'd say your opinion is very debatable.

DAF86

04-12-2018, 12:11 AM

Manu never had a season with a PER over 25. Kobe and Wade had several. Further, aside from 2005 and 2014, Manu's efficiency took a dive every year in the playoffs. As the minutes went up, his effectiveness decreased.

So yeah, I'd say your opinion is very debatable.

Despite it's name PER isn't the best tool to determine efficiency since it tends to favour chuckers, tbh.

TDfan2007

04-12-2018, 01:36 AM

Despite it's name PER isn't the best tool to determine efficiency since it tends to favour chuckers, tbh.

No it doesn't. Tim Duncan and LeBron James have some of the best PER numbers in league history, and both players were FAR from chuckers. The season when Kobe had the most FGA/game for his career (04-05) was also one of his lowest in terms of PER (23.3).

Manu was great, but he's in a tier below Kobe and Wade, right there with AI, Ray Allen, and Reggie. He's still one of the best to ever do it at the 2 guard position and imo the best passing SG of all time.

DAF86

04-12-2018, 01:47 AM

No it doesn't. Tim Duncan and LeBron James have some of the best PER numbers in league history, and both players were FAR from chuckers. The season when Kobe had the most FGA/game for his career (04-05) was also one of his lowest in terms of PER (23.3).

Manu was great, but he's in a tier below Kobe and Wade, right there with AI, Ray Allen, and Reggie. He's still one of the best to ever do it at the 2 guard position and imo the best passing SG of all time.

Don't get me wrong, I agree Manu is behind Kobe and (probably) Wade. In fact, I said it above. But as advanced stats got deeper, PER started to get more and more exposed as a stat that favoured the guys that shoot more, and although guys like Lebron and Duncan aren't chuckers, they were guys that tended to shoot more than the rest because, well, they were fricking superstars.

The criticism behind PER is that it doesn't punish bad shooting as much as Turnovers, and that the trade off between shot made/shot missed is always better the more you shoot. I don't know the exact formula but there are some articles about it out there if you are interested.

Bottom line is that if Manu would have taken more shots over his career, chances are his PER would have been better, even if his FG% would have decreased because of the extended workload.

Kawhitstorm

04-12-2018, 01:52 AM

DAF86

04-12-2018, 01:56 AM

Most likely would lead the league in turnobilis

Maybe, but I doubt it. Manu as a number one option would still not be as ball dominant as the guys who lead the league in turnovers like Harden, Westbrook and Lebron.

TDfan2007

04-12-2018, 10:13 AM

Don't get me wrong, I agree Manu is behind Kobe and (probably) Wade. In fact, I said it above. But as advanced stats got deeper, PER started to get more and more exposed as a stat that favoured the guys that shoot more, and although guys like Lebron and Duncan aren't chuckers, they were guys that tended to shoot more than the rest because, well, they were fricking superstars.

The criticism behind PER is that it doesn't punish bad shooting as much as Turnovers, and that the trade off between shot made/shot missed is always better the more you shoot. I don't know the exact formula but there are some articles about it out there if you are interested.

Bottom line is that if Manu would have taken more shots over his career, chances are his PER would have been better, even if his FG% would have decreased because of the extended workload.

I always thought that, if anything, PER tended to favor big men, but I see your point. Personally, I think there's a big "what if" in Manu's career. How successful would he have been as a number 1 option?

I think he would've been almost what Harden is now, offensively, but idk for how long. He played wrecklessly and incredibly hard every minute, and he already had a tough enough time staying healthy in his more limited role. Would've been fun to watch.

As a Spurs fan, I just wish he would've been healthy for more playoff runs. I think we get to the finals in 2008 with a healthy Manu. 2009 might've been tougher though. Then there was the broken nose in 2010