Manu has a legit argument for third best spur ever behind TD and Drob..

[apalisoc_9]

For now at least since Kawhi will overtake him and Drob and possibly duncan.

But from 2003-2007, no one was more instrumental in clutch games than Manu..no one.

Manu the best Spurs Guard we will ever see.

I always chuckle when i read old timers post Stat Padding playing against 5'8 white guys goerge gervin..pe wee league compeitiom should not count. I know hes a sf but just a side comment when i see posters putting him above Manu.

[cutewizard]

agree

:bobo

[jhfenton]

I expect this kind of serious intellectualism from you. Thank you for not disappointing.

[Hemotivo]

:tu

[Gagnrath]

You could make a legit argument for him, for Gervin, for Parker, and you could probably toss Avery Johnson, Steve Kerr, and Denis Rodman into that argument as well.

A lot of it comes from how you choose to define best, and weather or not your just putting that person in the argument because a real case can be made or if most logical people feel that the are among the "best spurs".

[hater]

The books of history will read

Duncan
Drob
Kawhi
Parker
Germin
Manu

In that order

[Diego20]

:bobo

I don't agree on Kawhi part though, he can surpass Manu, Parker and Rob but not Duncan imo..

[Aztecfan03]

The books of history will read

Duncan
Drob
Kawhi
Parker
Germin
Manu

In that order
probably, but kawhi might end up over drob.

[Obstructed_View]

You know, saying stupid inflammatory shit about players you never watched doesn't make for good discussion. Welcome to my ignore list.

[jag]

Tony is the 3rd greatest player in Spurs history. It's already been decided

[kaji157]

I think by the numbers parker is above him, because he always played more, and also during his prime in 2005-2006 Manu allowed pop to run the offense thru Tony (keeping Tim and Manu fresh for when it matters).
But Spurs fans will always think of Manu as the better, more committed and loveable player of both. Manu will be also regarded as one of the most influential basketball players of his generation for what he did internationally with Argentina forcing a change of perspective in USA Baksetball, and in the NBA where he was the first Allstar to accept a bench role in his prime during the modern era. Also in FIBA, where baskerball is not about numbers no one will put Tony over Manu, because iq is elemental.

[Brazil]

For now at least since Kawhi will overtake him and Drob and possibly duncan.



just for those who are not yet familiar with OP work, trolling is in first sentence. Thread is not really about Manu but about his man crush for Kawhi... Player fans... Smh

i particularly love the possibly Duncan :lol

[mbass]

I think by the numbers parker is above him, because he always played more, and also during his prime in 2005-2006 Manu allowed pop to run the offense thru Tony (keeping Tim and Manu fresh for when it matters).
But Spurs fans will always think of Manu as the better, more committed and loveable player of both. Manu will be also regarded as one of the most influential basketball players of his generation for what he did internationally with Argentina forcing a change of perspective in USA Baksetball, and in the NBA where he was the first Allstar to accept a bench role in his prime during the modern era. Also in FIBA, where baskerball is not about numbers no one will put Tony over Manu, because iq is elemental.

Absolutely - also, next to Robinson, Manu is the most endearing and lovable spur. Always willing to give an interview and sign an autograph for the fans.

[steeledl]

just for those who are not yet familiar with OP work, trolling is in first sentence. Thread is not really about Manu but about his man crush for Kawhi... Player fans... Smh

i particularly love the possibly Duncan :lol

Good catch that was def. his agenda. ... I tend not to actually read his reasoning and just laugh at others shitting on his posts.

[Canyonero]

Best guard to ever play for SAS tbh

[SpursforSix]

You could make a legit argument for him, for Gervin, for Parker, and you could probably toss Avery Johnson, Steve Kerr, and Denis Rodman into that argument as well.

A lot of it comes from how you choose to define best, and weather or not your just putting that person in the argument because a real case can be made or if most logical people feel that the are among the "best spurs".

You need to add Strickland and Horry to your list. And Wilkins.

[steeledl]

Duncan, Robinson, Gervin/Parker, Manu.

People forget how short lived Manu's prime was in SA.... really only a few years. He also has costed us too many big playoff games like game 6. Parker was the engine for both of our runs against the Heat and Manu was really never the man for a title run.

[skulls138]

Duncan, Robinson, Gervin/Parker, Manu.

People forget how short lived Manu's prime was in SA.... really only a few years. He also has costed us too many big playoff games like game 6. Parker was the engine for both of our runs against the Heat and Manu was really never the man for a title run.Think youre SERIOUSLY downplaying Manus role in getting ring number 5. He was the the second MVP behind Kawhi in that series and dont forget his last second shot against OKC. It was that shot that made Spurs seem invincible....which they then became. Love Parker, who I am now calling mini-Hakeem, but pick Manu over him.

[BillMc]

just for those who are not yet familiar with OP work, trolling is in first sentence. Thread is not really about Manu but about his man crush for Kawhi... Player fans... Smh

i particularly love the possibly Duncan :lol

Yep, it is another thread meant to divide Spurs fans, which, of course, is OP's eternal agenda.

[Arcadian]

Kawhi will overtake Manu, but never DRob or TD because those guys didn't even need to develop - they were instant superstars and rookies of the year. Kawhi has already "missed the boat" for being that kind of player, but don't take it as an insult because only a few players in history were at that level.

[SpursforSix]

Think youre SERIOUSLY downplaying Manus role in getting ring number 5. He was the the second MVP behind Kawhi in that series and dont forget his last second shot against OKC. It was that shot that made Spurs seem invincible....which they then became. Love Parker, who I am now calling mini-Hakeem, but pick Manu over him.

And the assist to Horry in game 5 vs Detroit. Huge.

[Gagnrath]

You need to add Strickland and Horry to your list. And Wilkins.
Good point was just coming up with a way to show the premise as stated was somewhat ludicrous.

[cjw]

Which franchises can put up a team that can compete with that starting five (Parker/Gervin/Kawhi/Duncan/Robinson) with Manu off the bench - requirement being that you play more games with that team than any other (e.g., Heat don't get Lebron)? Probably just the Lakers and Celtics.

More amazingly, they all played their entire career with the Spurs outside of Gervin's farewell season in Chicago.


Anyone putting Parker, Ginobili and even Kawhi as being unquestionably above Gervin is crazy. A guy with four scoring titles and shot over 50% over his career. Was basically prime TMac for a pretty long period. After MJ, Kobe, West, Clyde and Wade, he's probably the next best SG. ESPN just put Iverson ahead of him too - much less efficiency, but he did make a Finals.

True, he never had the postseason success of Parker/Manu but his teams averaged ~47 win pace (lowest total of 37) and missed the playoffs just once. For comparison, Kobe's teams have averaged 49 wins and have missed the playoffs 4x.

In the playoffs, there were: 3 Rd1 exits, 2 Rd2 exits and 3 conf finals exits. If only CP3 could reach those heights.

Not arguing that Gervin is definitively #3, but you can't say the same about any of Manu/Parker/Kawhi either.

[Tully365]

Every thread by this guy pits one player against another player. Such a horrible poster.

[spursfaninla]

OP's convoluted thread is just his opinion on about 3 potential different topics all mashed into one, with no analysis, no reasoning, just bc he says so.

title topic(s): Manu is best spurs guard of all time,
manu is 3rd best spur all time

real topic(s): kawhi will be better than Robinson and TD;
parker is not on the all-time spurs list because manu was more "clutch"

Too bad. Handing just one topic, and if done intelligently, had potential, and posters are making attempts at using the potential here.

Although the parker vs. Manu debate has been done to death during their respective primes, at least the topic has not been done recently, and so near the end of their careers. Worth a revisit once TP retires, for sure.

As far as Kawhi on the all-time spurs list, way to early to know for sure. Super excited about Kawhi, he is way better than I hoped he would be, and I think he IS arguably the best 2-way wing player in the league today, although it is close with PG and Lebron.

Yes, Kawhi has the POTENTIAL to be better than DR all time, which is incredible and I am excited and hopeful that after another 7-8 years, we can have the discussion and there is justification to put Kawhi that high.

BUT, get real for today. Kawhi has YEARS of this same very high level play ahead of him assuming he stays healthy, before he deserves to be compared to DR, much less TD.

You can't assume health, motivation, or even consistency in player's careers, and you will need all 3 for Kawhi to be in the conversation.

Look at some of David's accomplishments:

career average 21 and 10

Honors: NBA champion (1999, 2003); NBA MVP (1995); Defensive Player of the Year (1992); Rookie of the Year (1990); All-NBA First Team (1991, '92, '95, '96); All-NBA Second Team (1994, '98); All-NBA Third Team (1990, '93, 2000, '01); All-Defensive First Team (1991, '92, '95, '96); All-Defensive Second Team (1990, '93, '94, '98); 10-time NBA All-Star

led the league in PER for several years;
was a volume high percentage scorer for years;
DPOY level D during 2003 (teammakes joked about TD getting 1st team Defense instead of David that year)

TD leads the league in RDPM this year, and has been on the all-defensive 1st or 2nd team 15 times.

5× NBA champion (1999, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2014)
3× NBA Finals MVP (1999, 2003, 2005)
2× NBA Most Valuable Player (2002–2003)
15× NBA All-Star (1998, 2000–2011, 2013, 2015)
10× All-NBA First Team (1998–2005, 2007, 2013)
3× All-NBA Second Team (2006, 2008–2009)
2× All-NBA Third Team (2010, 2015)
8× NBA All-Defensive First Team (1999–2003, 2005, 2007–2008)
7× NBA All-Defensive Second Team (1998, 2004, 2006, 2009–2010, 2013, 2015)
NBA Rookie of the Year (1998)
San Antonio Spurs all-time leading scorer

[spursfaninla]

If I WAS going to make the argument for "best peak year" for a spurs player, Kawhi is at least in that conversation with his play this year, assuming he continues his high level of 2 way play for the whole year. Given that Kawhi is not at his physical peak to come around age 28, I will give him a few more years before we shut the door on that topic, but let the guy finish the year first at least before we look hard at it.

Even then, TD and D-rob both had some spectacular years.

[spursfaninla]

as for Manu's place in all time nba/spurs lists, yes, he deserves consideration, and he is amazing in his efficiency even today. However, we have to admit, he never had to carry the team from a scoring perspective for any appreciable amount of time, and he suffers from his relatively low minutes per game, his fragility, and the fact that he had just as many MASSIVE fails in key moments as he had magnificent clutch moments.

[Silver&Black]

"I don't care about any of that. I just want to win championships"

[Mikeanaro]

as for Manu's place in all time nba/spurs lists, yes, he deserves consideration, and he is amazing in his efficiency even today. However, we have to admit, he never had to carry the team from a scoring perspective for any appreciable amount of time, and he suffers from his relatively low minutes per game, his fragility, and the fact that he had just as many MASSIVE fails in key moments as he had magnificent clutch moments.
If he had such MASSIVE FAILS as you say then what about Gervin and DRob? they were playoff failures.
Most times Manu had to make decisions because nobody had the balls to do something and now he is a massive failure entrepreneur.

[BillMc]

"I don't care about any of that. I just want to win championships"
:bobo

[BillMc]

Every thread by this guy pits one player against another player. Such a horrible poster.

[Silver&Black]

Every thread by this guy pits one player against another player. Such a horrible poster.

Why can't we all focus our hate on where it belongs......................

Matt Bonner.

[Cry Havoc]

Yep, it is another thread meant to divide Spurs fans, which, of course, is OP's eternal agenda.

It's a lot simpler than that.

OP is a fucking tool, and enjoys spending years of his life trying to be edgy because he lives in the perpetual state of mind of someone who's never left middle school.

[spursfaninla]

If he had such MASSIVE FAILS as you say then what about Gervin and DRob? they were playoff failures.
Most times Manu had to make decisions because nobody had the balls to do something and now he is a massive failure entrepreneur.

Ok, let me give you my full impression, because for the record, I see manu and parker as very similar in terms of spurs success, career-wise other than the tie-breaker of parker playing more minutes and having more responsibility for scoring for several years:

best passing SG of all time consideration.

Definitely had MANY clutch moments in the playoffs;

could have easily been the FMVP instead of parker in 2007.

BUT:

Manu's last second foul on Dirk in game 7 cost us a chance in 2006.

Manu had a TERRIBLE finals series in 2013 overall; if he played average, we have 6 championships.
8 turnovers in key game 6.
He had a turnover % of 23%, and the worst defensive rating for a spur in the mainline rotation during that series per basketballreference.com.
(tP was not that much better tho, tbh).

[skulls138]

Why can't we all focus our hate on where it belongs......................

Matt Bonner.I know, I mean hate absorption is the very reason he was resigned.

[AFMadison]

Why can't we all focus our hate on where it belongs......................

Matt Bonner.
Bonner is life

[Mikeanaro]

Ok, let me give you my full impression, because for the record, I see manu and parker as very similar in terms of spurs success, career-wise other than the tie-breaker of parker playing more minutes and having more responsibility for scoring for several years:

best passing SG of all time consideration.

Definitely had MANY clutch moments in the playoffs;

could have easily been the FMVP instead of parker in 2007.

BUT:

Manu's last second foul on Dirk in game 7 cost us a chance in 2006.

Manu had a TERRIBLE finals series in 2013 overall; if he played average, we have 6 championships.
8 turnovers in key game 6.
He had a turnover % of 23%, and the worst defensive rating for a spur in the mainline rotation during that series per basketballreference.com.
(tP was not that much better tho, tbh).
Parker was the FMVP because of the Longoria thing NBA loves that kind of stuff they were showing videos of those 2 during the finals there is no way other player was gonna get the award, 2007 was Duncan´s year and 2005 Manu´s year.
Didnt cost us a chance, there was an overtime






0:17.9


115-111

M. Finley (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/f/finlemi01.html) misses 3-pt shot from 24 ft


0:15.9
Defensive rebound by J. Terry (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/terryja01.html)

115-111




0:15.9
Personal foul by R. Horry (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/horryro01.html) (drawn by J. Terry (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/terryja01.html))

115-111




0:15.9
J. Terry (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/terryja01.html) makes free throw 1 of 2
+1
116-111




0:15.9
A. Griffin (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/griffad01.html) enters the game for D. Diop (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/diopde01.html)

116-111




0:15.9
J. Terry (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/terryja01.html) makes free throw 2 of 2
+1
117-111




0:15.9


117-111

San Antonio 20 second timeout


0:15.9


117-111

B. Bowen (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bowenbr01.html) enters the game for R. Horry (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/horryro01.html)


0:11.9


117-111

T. Duncan (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/duncati01.html) misses 3-pt shot from 26 ft


0:11.8
Defensive rebound by Team

117-111




0:09.9
Personal foul by T. Parker (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/parketo01.html) (drawn by D. Nowitzki (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nowitdi01.html))

117-111




0:09.9
D. Nowitzki (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nowitdi01.html) makes free throw 1 of 2
+1
118-111




0:09.9
D. Nowitzki (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nowitdi01.html) makes free throw 2 of 2
+1
119-111




0:04.9


119-111

M. Finley (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/f/finlemi01.html) misses 3-pt shot from 27 ft


0:02.9
Defensive rebound by A. Griffin (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/griffad01.html)

119-111




0:00.0
End of 1st overtime
















And Parker shooting 6/23 during game 6 had nothing to do I guess, neither DG shooting 1/7, yes he had 8 turnovers but 6/23 is inexcusable, besides Gay Ray travelled and the last play during overtime was a joke, Manu was fouled and they gave freebies to Gay.

Manu was there for game 7 but some other players were thinking about packing their stuff and going home, Parker 3/12, DG 1/12, Neal 2/7.
When Manu fucked up things there was and overtime yet to be played and in 2013 another game so blaming him for the horrible performances his team mates had is unfair.

Considering he won in Europe, with his NT and with Spurs he cant be such a Massive Failure menace after all.

[honestfool84]

Lolz

[cd98]

Duncan, Robinson, Gervin/Parker, Manu.

People forget how short lived Manu's prime was in SA.... really only a few years. He also has costed us too many big playoff games like game 6. Parker was the engine for both of our runs against the Heat and Manu was really never the man for a title run.

Did you miss 2005? Manu only a few years of a prime? It's like you've only watched the Spurs for the last three years.

[cd98]

Did anyone watch 2006 series with Mavs. We were down in the series and Manu resurrection brought us back. He was an absolute stud. And many forget we were down 20+ in that game 7 and none other than Manu brought us back. Sure it was a bad decision on that Dirk foul, but Manu is a gambler and he was looking for a big play. If he gets a block on that play, he's the hero. I can't blame guys willing to take that chance in the heat of battle. I'll take a 50% Manu into the playoffs any day, but he's had lots of great moments in a stellar career. Easily top 5 Spur and possibly top 4. Kawhi has a lot to accomplish before he can be in the top 5 of Spurs, though he's off to a great start.

[DarrinS]

Best passer and arguably most creative playmaking Spur

[Cry Havoc]

Best passer and arguably most creative playmaking Spur

One of the greatest passers in NBA history. Manu may not be a top 10 player but he's going to have a top five highlight reel, IMO.

[ElNono]

He'll never be top 3 as far as individual accolades... that's fine. But IMO, the "Big 4" of Pop/TD/TP/Manu are the top 4 from a franchise perspective. I know the usual argument to this is that the franchise wouldn't be here if Gervin wasn't around or DRob wasn't around, but what if these 4 guys wouldn't have found their way here? I don't think the Spurs would've survived either, and on top of that, they gave us continued success and 5 championships (and counting). Hope everyone that followed the Spurs long enough are soaking it all in, because these are the "good times".

[Raven]

why behind drob?

[steeledl]

Did you miss 2005? Manu only a few years of a prime? It's like you've only watched the Spurs for the last three years.

Duncan was th man in 05.... That's not really debatable. Manu hasn't been a legit star player for more than 5 years now.

[cd98]

Duncan was th man in 05.... That's not really debatable. Manu hasn't been a legit star player for more than 5 years now.
Actually it is debatable. Duncan won the MVP vote over Manu by one vote. They were both great, but it was an uphill battle for Manu to get the MVP over Duncan given that Duncan was recognized as the best power forward of all time by 2005.

[Blue Duck]

Manu didn't give the assist to Horry in game 5 vs. Detroit. That was brent Barry. However, menu's impact was greater than some here give him credit for. Case in point, late season injuries in both 2008, and 2011 caused the team to look completely different afterwards, given their heavy reliance on his creativity and play making abilities before. To quote Doug Collins' mantra throughout those years, "the spurs are very good, Manu makes them special". That said, I'm happy to have all of those guys, and for my money, Sean belongs on that list somewhere.

[Blue Duck]

Now I'm second guessing myself. Was it brent or manu, the game 5assist?

[itzsoweezee]

just for those who are not yet familiar with OP work, trolling is in first sentence. Thread is not really about Manu but about his man crush for Kawhi... Player fans... Smh

i particularly love the possibly Duncan :lol

Says the guy who openly shits on Kawhi to pump his own Parker agenda.

[spurraider21]

why behind drob?
http://cdn2.crushable.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/mal-what.gif

[steeledl]

Actually it is debatable. Duncan won the MVP vote over Manu by one vote. They were both great, but it was an uphill battle for Manu to get the MVP over Duncan given that Duncan was recognized as the best power forward of all time by 2005.

You are talking about one individual series. Duncan was by far the best player on our team over the course of that season and playoffs.

[SouthernFried]

Ok, here it is.

Duncan is #1 and all the others in contention...are tied for #2.

:hat

[Raven]

Now I'm second guessing myself. Was it brent or manu, the game 5assist?
it was manu lol :lol

[lilbthebasedgod]

2legit tbh fam

[Mikeanaro]

You are talking about one individual series. Duncan was by far the best player on our team over the course of that season and playoffs.
Define by far, Manu scored shit like 32 and 39 points during those playoffs.

[cd98]

You are talking about one individual series. Duncan was by far the best player on our team over the course of that season and playoffs.

Look, Duncan is the best Spur all-time, but that year Manu was just as important as Duncan. He was the closer...the player with the ball the last 5 minutes of every close game. He was either scoring, creating, or making free throws. Like every player in the NBA, when he turned 34, he wasn't the same player as he was at 28. But he's been damn good in most years, even in a reduced role, and this year he's been essential. We can't win it all without him. I'm guessing you started watching the Spurs 4 or 5 years ago. Anyone that watched Manu from 26-32 would never doubt his greatness and sustained excellence. How many players have been as good as him for so long? Not many.

[steeledl]

Look, Duncan is the best Spur all-time, but that year Manu was just as important as Duncan. He was the closer...the player with the ball the last 5 minutes of every close game. He was either scoring, creating, or making free throws. Like every player in the NBA, when he turned 34, he wasn't the same player as he was at 28. But he's been damn good in most years, even in a reduced role, and this year he's been essential. We can't win it all without him. I'm guessing you started watching the Spurs 4 or 5 years ago. Anyone that watched Manu from 26-32 would never doubt his greatness and sustained excellence. How many players have been as good as him for so long? Not many.

Just because your opinion is different than mine doesnt mean I just recently started watching the Spurs. I've been watching the Spurs since before Duncan. Manu had a great 4 year stretch but was never the man on this team. He declined quickly, costed us playoff series, and didn't have the sustained excellence nor was never the man on a championship team as Parker did. That doesn't mean he isnt a Spurs great and I dont respect him.... I put him at 5th all time on my list... I just think there is a pretty decent gap between 4 and 5.

[Blue Duck]

it was manu lol :lol

Oops, thanks

[Spurtacular]

I always chuckle when i read old timers post Stat Padding playing against 5'8 white guys goerge gervin..pe wee league compeitiom should not count. I know hes a sf but just a side comment when i see posters putting him above Manu.

Spare us your racist hyperbole for once, fuckface.

[ElNono]

Manu didn't give the assist to Horry in game 5 vs. Detroit. That was brent Barry.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjPgAQQst7U

[Raven]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjPgAQQst7U

how can you forget the biggest moment in basketball tbh

[cd98]

Just because your opinion is different than mine doesnt mean I just recently started watching the Spurs. I've been watching the Spurs since before Duncan. Manu had a great 4 year stretch but was never the man on this team. He declined quickly, costed us playoff series, and didn't have the sustained excellence nor was never the man on a championship team as Parker did. That doesn't mean he isnt a Spurs great and I dont respect him.... I put him at 5th all time on my list... I just think there is a pretty decent gap between 4 and 5.

Great 4 year stretch? He made the all-star team in 2005 and 2011 and he was the 6th man of the year is 2008. He averaged double figures from 2003 to 2015 and his numbers didn’t see a real decline until 2011-2012 season. And he continued to be a key cog since the 2011 season in both scoring and playmaking. I agree that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it’s pure fact that Manu’s prime was more than just 4 years. He’s an all-time great in the NBA, not just the Spurs. He was every bit as important as either Tim or Tony in the 2005 and 2007 championships. If not for his all-around game, we would not have won in 2005 for sure, and it’s possible the same could be said for our most watered down title in 2007.

[BSfromTX]

Manu is third best... If I were to pick a team from all spurs players, it would be hard not to pick him that high. Assuming you can't pick prime Dominique or Moses malone

[SouthernFried]

If I were picking a team to WIN...and not just look good on the court. Here's my team.

Duncan
Robinson
Manu
Kawhi
Parker

And I would put this up against any other team's best 5 in history. It's hard to realize how great our team and players have been, from an historical perspective...when we are currently living it. These players are all going to be legends.

[cjw]

Spare us your racist hyperbole for once, fuckface.

He's acting as if Gervin played in the 50s-60s and not the 70s-80s.

If anything, he was playing against a bunch of coked up guys

[Vito Corleone]

Manu and Tony have not passed Gervin, period.

It remains to be seen if Kawhi can pass him, but for now the History book reads like this.

Timmy
D'Rob
Gervin

Then it's everyone else.

[steeledl]

Manu and Tony have not passed Gervin, period.

It remains to be seen if Kawhi can pass him, but for now the History book reads like this.

Timmy
D'Rob
Gervin

Then it's everyone else.

This nigga knows. I can tell this poster saw Gervin play based on user name and avatar alone.

[SouthernFried]

I saw Gervin play...a lot. And Gervin had no Defense. Love the guy, but, I would pick Manu.

If you're talking about a pure shooter/scorer. Than Gervin is number 1...and it ain't even close.

[Spurtacular]

Manu and Tony have not passed Gervin, period.

It remains to be seen if Kawhi can pass him, but for now the History book reads like this.

Timmy
D'Rob
Gervin

Then it's everyone else.

Manu > Gervin

[barbacoataco]

Career value
Duncan
DRob
Gervin
Parker
Manu
Leonard

Peak value
Duncan
DRob- very close between top 2
Leonard
Manu
Gervin
Parker

[sasaint]

Career value
Duncan
DRob
Gervin
Parker
Manu
Leonard

Peak value
Duncan
DRob- very close between top 2
Leonard
Manu
Gervin
Parker

Interesting way to break it down. On that basis the only change I would make is in your "Peak Value" list. At his peak, DRob was tops. But exactly when was Timmy's peak? The guy personifies the term "sustained excellence."

[Blue Duck]

how can you forget the biggest moment in basketball tbh

Yeah, yeah, I know. I caught myself. I was remembering the championship dvd went brent spoke of that moment and Rasheed Wallace leaving a shooter with Horry's history wide open. But hey, at least I still remember that Vinny Del Negro passed the ball to Sean Elliott for the memorial day miracle in 97. KIDDING, JUST KIDDING! !!

[Kidd K]

I'm convinced people like the OP are actually not Spurfans and make retarded threads like this to turn Spurfans on their own players by acting like a deluded Kobe fan.

[skulls138]

I'm convinced people like the OP are actually not Spurfans and make retarded threads like this to turn Spurfans on their own players by acting like a deluded Kobe fan.And yet we keep it afloat:bobo

[tmtcsc]

Manu is # 2 to Duncan in my opinion.

[Kidd K]

And yet we keep it afloat:bobo

:bobo

[Brazil]

Says the guy who openly shits on Kawhi to pump his own Parker agenda.

who the fuck are you again ?

where did I openly shit on Kawhi ?

:lol

[midnightpulp]

Gervin is legit (36th all-time in PER, 68th WS/48, 35th Offensive Box Plus/Minus) but Manu is the better all around and impactful player.

[tholdren]

I think by the numbers parker is above him, because he always played more, and also during his prime in 2005-2006 Manu allowed pop to run the offense thru Tony (keeping Tim and Manu fresh for when it matters).
But Spurs fans will always think of Manu as the better, more committed and loveable player of both. Manu will be also regarded as one of the most influential basketball players of his generation for what he did internationally with Argentina forcing a change of perspective in USA Baksetball, and in the NBA where he was the first Allstar to accept a bench role in his prime during the modern era. Also in FIBA, where baskerball is not about numbers no one will put Tony over Manu, because iq is elemental.

Manu is #3 - Tim could not be #1 without manu.

[hater]

After further thought my list still stands. And its the correct one:

Duncan
Drob
Parker
Leonard
Germin
Manu

Manu js not even top 5 spur

[MaNu4Tres]

If you had one game to win for your life, and you had to choose between one of Gervin, Manu or Parker to play with you in the backcourt --- who would you choose?


To me the answer is easy.

But I'm curious to know what others think.

[100%duncan]

Career value
Duncan
DRob
Gervin
Parker
Manu
Leonard

Peak value
Duncan
DRob- very close between top 2
Leonard
Manu
Gervin
Parker

How do you even rate kawhi with career and peak when he's just 24 freaking yrs old

[dabom]

Manu is higher than Tony. That's for sure. Both HOF players though.

[pgardn]

Manu and Tony have not passed Gervin, period.

It remains to be seen if Kawhi can pass him, but for now the History book reads like this.

Timmy
D'Rob
Gervin

Then it's everyone else.

This.

Gervin was clutch in the playoffs and the only reason the Spurs were there. It could be argued that the SPURS MIGHT HAVE NEVER MADE IT TO THE NBA FROM THE ABA without Gervin. Gervin put San Antonio on the map.

[MB20]

1. Tim
2. DRob
3.Gervin
4.Parker
5.Manu

Has Kawhi surpassed other Spurs greats yet? Larry K, Artis G, Capt Late ?

[pgardn]

just for those who are not yet familiar with OP work, trolling is in first sentence. Thread is not really about Manu but about his man crush for Kawhi... Player fans... Smh

i particularly love the possibly Duncan :lol

But the OP was ravaged by this very board after he ravaged his Aunt?
Remember the pity:

He had no food.
He had no job.
His head fell off.

Now look at him. Back and proud.

[littlecoyotecoin]

Did anyone watch 2006 series with Mavs. We were down in the series and Manu resurrection brought us back. He was an absolute stud. And many forget we were down 20+ in that game 7 and none other than Manu brought us back. Sure it was a bad decision on that Dirk foul, but Manu is a gambler and he was looking for a big play. If he gets a block on that play, he's the hero. I can't blame guys willing to take that chance in the heat of battle. I'll take a 50% Manu into the playoffs any day, but he's had lots of great moments in a stellar career. Easily top 5 Spur and possibly top 4. Kawhi has a lot to accomplish before he can be in the top 5 of Spurs, though he's off to a great start.

[Mikeanaro]

90% of the times when Manu comes off the bench Spurs finds lots of anwers he doesnt need to score and when he leaves Spurs lose the lead and shit like that, it happens even now this season and he is 97 years old so cut the crap.

[kaji157]

If you had one game to win for your life, and you had to choose between one of Gervin, Manu or Parker to play with you in the backcourt --- who would you choose?


To me the answer is easy.

But I'm curious to know what others think.

That´s the correct assessment, if your life depended on it to play for you, who´d everyone pick. Of those 3 i´d go with Manu Ginobili.

[houston spurs fan]

That´s the correct assessment, if your life depended on it to play for you, who´d everyone pick. Of those 3 i´d go with Manu Ginobili.
Just look at Pop. Who still has the ball in his hands with 20 seconds left on the clock with a big coming for the high screen? It's Ginobili still even after all these years. Win or lose I want the ball in his hands...

[hater]

Did anyone watch the 2013 Finals Game 6?

[tmtcsc]

My Top 4 today:

1. Tim
2. Drob
3. Manu
4. Ice

Kawhi needs more time to solidify his ranking but I imagine he is very close to top 5. Time will tell.

[dunkman]

Would have to go with Gervin or TP. Kawhi has already won a finals MVP and DPOY, he may be on track to surpass TP and Manu, taking on DRob will take a lot of consistency. DRob was the centerpiece of Spurs teams that made deep playoffs runs, has an MVP, DPOY, several All-NBA, All-Defense to his name too. He was a top player before Duncan was drafted.

[TheGreatYacht]

Duncan
Robinson
Parker/Gervin
Manu
Sean
Silas
Bowen

I think Lamarcus has potential to enter the Top 5, depending on how many rings he helps bring

[tholdren]

If you had one game to win for your life, and you had to choose between one of Gervin, Manu or Parker to play with you in the backcourt --- who would you choose?


To me the answer is easy.

But I'm curious to know what others think.
to me the answer is easy: manu

[tholdren]

This.

Gervin was clutch in the playoffs and the only reason the Spurs were there. It could be argued that the SPURS MIGHT HAVE NEVER MADE IT TO THE NBA FROM THE ABA without Gervin. Gervin put San Antonio on the map.

Gervin was a volume shooter - terrible 3pt shooter - not a good defender. Manu has higher advanced playoff stats WS/OWS/DWS/VORP/+-

- I get your sentiment about nostalgia and historical impact of a player - part of me will still argue that Drob is better than Tim (Drob has a higher career per and is only .003 off MJ for career WS/48) but from an all around skill set and competitive player I would take manu hands down.

[ThaBigFundamental21]

I get sick of reading all the posts disrespecting Gervin. Just because Gervin wasn't a part of the Duncan era doesn't make him any less impressive or great. If you so called fans can't even respect the Spurs history, don't expect anyone else to.

[apalisoc_9]

Are we seriously putting Gervin over Parker and Manu :lmao

[pgardn]

Are we seriously putting Gervin over Parker and Manu :lmao

Yes.

Just like you wanted to get over your aunt.
Heyoooooooo!

[daledondale]

If you had one game to win for your life, and you had to choose between one of Gervin, Manu or Parker to play with you in the backcourt --- who would you choose?


To me the answer is easy.

But I'm curious to know what others think.
Easy to me too. Manu.

Are we seriously putting Gervin over Parker and Manu :lmao
This too.

[apalisoc_9]

Gervin couldnt even win a ring playing against 5'6 white guys and were putting him over Manu and Parker who both played in the 2010 era the peak of basketball :lmao

[pgardn]

Gervin couldnt even win a ring playing against 5'6 white guys and were putting him over Manu and Parker who both played in the 2010 era the peak of basketball :lmao

Sure.

5' 6" Asians slobbering on their aunties.
Did you vote in your own poll wishing Tony Parker to get injured as well?

[barbacoataco]

Gervin couldnt even win a ring playing against 5'6 white guys and were putting him over Manu and Parker who both played in the 2010 era the peak of basketball :lmao

Yeah, one of Gervin's best years in 1983 he lost in the playoffs to the Lakers with Kareem and Magic. Where are the 5'6" white guys? You think Kareem and Magic wouldn't tear up today's NBA? You're acting like Gervin played in the 50's or 60's.

[apalisoc_9]

80's nutrition , training and talent pool tearing up 2010's players...:lmao

[Diego20]

Just because your opinion is different than mine doesnt mean I just recently started watching the Spurs. I've been watching the Spurs since before Duncan. Manu had a great 4 year stretch but was never the man on this team. He declined quickly, costed us playoff series, and didn't have the sustained excellence nor was never the man on a championship team as Parker did. That doesn't mean he isnt a Spurs great and I dont respect him.... I put him at 5th all time on my list... I just think there is a pretty decent gap between 4 and 5.

Nope, you definitely started watching Spurs when TP joined Spurs, you're a Parker tard.

[Doctor J]

Which franchises can put up a team that can compete with that starting five (Parker/Gervin/Kawhi/Duncan/Robinson) with Manu off the bench - requirement being that you play more games with that team than any other (e.g., Heat don't get Lebron)? Probably just the Lakers and Celtics.

More amazingly, they all played their entire career with the Spurs outside of Gervin's farewell season in Chicago.


Anyone putting Parker, Ginobili and even Kawhi as being unquestionably above Gervin is crazy. A guy with four scoring titles and shot over 50% over his career. Was basically prime TMac for a pretty long period. After MJ, Kobe, West, Clyde and Wade, he's probably the next best SG. ESPN just put Iverson ahead of him too - much less efficiency, but he did make a Finals.

True, he never had the postseason success of Parker/Manu but his teams averaged ~47 win pace (lowest total of 37) and missed the playoffs just once. For comparison, Kobe's teams have averaged 49 wins and have missed the playoffs 4x.

In the playoffs, there were: 3 Rd1 exits, 2 Rd2 exits and 3 conf finals exits. If only CP3 could reach those heights.

Not arguing that Gervin is definitively #3, but you can't say the same about any of Manu/Parker/Kawhi either.

This. Thank you.

[Russo21]

For now at least since Kawhi will overtake him and Drob and possibly duncan. Stopped reading the post after this sentence.

[kaji157]

Just look at Pop. Who still has the ball in his hands with 20 seconds left on the clock with a big coming for the high screen? It's Ginobili still even after all these years. Win or lose I want the ball in his hands...

Wow man, don´t you know everyone here is smarter than Pop?

Pop is just lucky to have Duncan.

[hater]

The act alone of the game 6 2013 finals should keep Manu out of the top 4 for the rest of eternity.

And for #5 its a toss up between Manu and gervin. I vote Gervin for the more durability and fingerroll.

[SASdynasty!]

If both players retired right now, Parker most likely goes down as the better player because of the load he carried and the fact that Manu was a bench player most of his career. Under a different situation, Manu has a good shot at being considered the better player resume-wise. The problem is that Parker still has a lot of basketball left to play, which just potentially add to his resume and widens the gap.

[AFMadison]

80's nutrition , training and talent pool tearing up 2010's players...:lmao
Terrible poster, thinking the 80's players couldn't hang with this soft ass generation is laughable.

[J_Paco]

I think by the numbers parker is above him, because he always played more, and also during his prime in 2005-2006 Manu allowed pop to run the offense thru Tony (keeping Tim and Manu fresh for when it matters).
But Spurs fans will always think of Manu as the better, more committed and loveable player of both. Manu will be also regarded as one of the most influential basketball players of his generation for what he did internationally with Argentina forcing a change of perspective in USA Baksetball, and in the NBA where he was the first Allstar to accept a bench role in his prime during the modern era. Also in FIBA, where baskerball is not about numbers no one will put Tony over Manu, because iq is elemental.

Your take is okay, until you got to the part about basketball I.Q. Why do some posters believe that Tony could be coached by one of the smartest coaches ever and play with two of the brightest teammates ever and still not have a high acumen of his own? He isn't John Stockton, Chris Paul or Jason Kidd, but his intelligence on the court has always be undervalued, IMO.

Anyway, back to the tripe written by the moronic OP. Kawhi has a serious chance of being the greatest SF the team has ever seen (sorry, George Gervin), but he'll never have the impact or sheer dominance from day 1 that Robinson and Duncan possessed.....

[J_Paco]

80's nutrition , training and talent pool tearing up 2010's players...:lmao

Damn, your pretty fucking stupid if you truly believe that Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and George Gervin couldn't kill in today's NBA. Jabbar would be fine but Johnson and Gervin would need to adjust to the prioritizing of outside shooting.

[SpursFan86]

I'm fine with putting Manu over Gervin, but no way in hell is Parker ahead of him.

Gervin was a mediocre defender, but so is Parker. The argument essentially comes down to who was the better offensive player...and I can't fathom how anyone could argue that Parker is better offensively than Gervin. The rings argument is ridiculous as well because Gervin never had even remotely as much help as Parker.

Also, once again people take the era differences to extremes. We're talking about the late-70s/80s, not the 50s. Yes, the league is stronger now than it was back then...that doesn't mean the greatest players from those eras couldn't still have great success in today's game.

As for Kawhi, I'd be absolutely shocked if he finished up ahead of D-Rob (much less Duncan). That's not a knock on Kawhi though - Duncan is a top 5 player of all-time and D-Rob is top 15-20.

[Vito Corleone]

Manu and Tony have not passed Gervin, period.

It remains to be seen if Kawhi can pass him, but for now the History book reads like this.

Timmy
D'Rob
Gervin

Then it's everyone else.

LOL not to give away my age, but my first Spurs game was against the St Louis Spirits. ABA Red, White, and Blue ball.

[skulls138]

I get sick of reading all the posts disrespecting Gervin. Just because Gervin wasn't a part of the Duncan era doesn't make him any less impressive or great. If you so called fans can't even respect the Spurs history, don't expect anyone else to.No disrespect here but I do value postseason success over individual stats. I think Duncan could have scored alot more points but he saw the big picture in that having the whole team be involved will bring more winning. Same goes with Manu and Parker

[SpursFan86]

You can't just look at postseason success in a vacuum though. Parker has played his entire career alongside a top 5 player in the league, as well as several other great players...not to mention being coached by arguably the greatest coach in NBA history.

Put Parker on those Gervin teams of the late-70s/early-80s. Does anyone in their right mind think he'd still have a lot of postseason success? Put Gervin on the Spurs with Duncan/Manu...do people really think the Spurs wouldn't have still won titles?

I just don't see Parker as being on the same level as guys like Gervin and Manu.

[Vito Corleone]

I saw Gervin play...a lot. And Gervin had no Defense. Love the guy, but, I would pick Manu.

If you're talking about a pure shooter/scorer. Than Gervin is number 1...and it ain't even close.

Gervin was a product of the time frame in which he played. Back then no one played defense. It wasn't until the Pistons of the late 80's that teams took notice that they could stop the other team from scoring. The defense argument is not valid as it wasn't considered part of the game outside of rebounding and going for steals.


Manu > Gervin

Neither Manu or Tony could carry a team for a full season like Timmy, DRob, or Gervin.


Manu is # 2 to Duncan in my opinion.

Manu can't even make an all-star game and he is supposedly better than two guys voted as top 40 in the history of the NBA.


If you had one game to win for your life, and you had to choose between one of Gervin, Manu or Parker to play with you in the backcourt --- who would you choose?


To me the answer is easy.

But I'm curious to know what others think.

Easy, it is Gervin, he would open things up considerably for our bigs down low.



90% of the times when Manu comes off the bench Spurs finds lots of anwers he doesnt need to score and when he leaves Spurs lose the lead and shit like that, it happens even now this season and he is 97 years old so cut the crap.

Being a spark plug off the bench is a lot easier than carrying the franchise for a decade. I love Manu and his ability to make his teammates better just by his presents, but Gervin was a franchise player, manu is just a player.


Yeah, one of Gervin's best years in 1983 he lost in the playoffs to the Lakers with Kareem and Magic. Where are the 5'6" white guys? You think Kareem and Magic wouldn't tear up today's NBA? You're acting like Gervin played in the 50's or 60's.

There is a reason I put that retard on ignore.

EDIT: I wish to apologize to all people with mental retardation, I didn't mean to offend you by comparing you to Apalisoc_9



I'm fine with putting Manu over Gervin, but no way in hell is Parker ahead of him.

Gervin was a mediocre defender, but so is Parker. The argument essentially comes down to who was the better offensive player...and I can't fathom how anyone could argue that Parker is better offensively than Gervin. The rings argument is ridiculous as well because Gervin never had even remotely as much help as Parker.

Also, once again people take the era differences to extremes. We're talking about the late-70s/80s, not the 50s. Yes, the league is stronger now than it was back then...that doesn't mean the greatest players from those eras couldn't still have great success in today's game.

As for Kawhi, I'd be absolutely shocked if he finished up ahead of D-Rob (much less Duncan). That's not a knock on Kawhi though - Duncan is a top 5 player of all-time and D-Rob is top 15-20.

If Manu is your favorite player and your opinion is he is the greatest ever, I'm fine, it's your opinion, but if you compare body of work Gervin is light years ahead of everyone outside of Tim and DRob.

[SpursFan86]

Yes, Gervin's resume is undoubtedly much more impressive than anyone outside of Duncan/Robinson...but when I judge players, I judge them almost solely on their impact on the court. Accolades are great and all, but they can often be flawed and aren't the best indicator of just how much a player helps their team. If you look at Kobe's body of work, you could easily argue that he's as good or maybe even better than Duncan. However practically anyone who's watched both of them play over the years and is knowledgeable about basketball will tell you that Duncan is clearly better than Kobe.

Manu doesn't have the gaudy numbers that Gervin does, but he's consistently had some absolutely massive impact on his teams. Even at 38 years old, he comes in the game and just immediately changes the way his team looks and plays. I have no doubts that if he were on another team where he played 35+ mpg and started, he would've been a perennial all-star and All-NBA player. Manu is better at making those around him better compared to Gervin, and I also think he's a noticeably better defender than Gervin ever was.

[Vito Corleone]

Yes, Gervin's resume is undoubtedly much more impressive than anyone outside of Duncan/Robinson...but when I judge players, I judge them almost solely on their impact on the court. Accolades are great and all, but they can often be flawed and aren't the best indicator of just how much a player helps their team. If you look at Kobe's body of work, you could easily argue that he's as good or maybe even better than Duncan. However practically anyone who's watched both of them play over the years and is knowledgeable about basketball will tell you that Duncan is clearly better than Kobe.

Manu doesn't have the gaudy numbers that Gervin does, but he's consistently had some absolutely massive impact on his teams. Even at 38 years old, he comes in the game and just immediately changes the way his team looks and plays. I have no doubts that if he were on another team where he played 35+ mpg and started, he would've been a perennial all-star and All-NBA player. Manu is better at making those around him better compared to Gervin, and I also think he's a noticeably better defender than Gervin ever was.

It is a lot easier to have an impact when you are not the focal point. Gervin carried this team, night in and night out. If he doesn't have a huge night the Spurs lose. He had some good players around him, but he never had a dominate player his equal he could lean on, he certainly didn't have anyone better than him like Manu has.

This is not a slight against Manu, I love him and his ability to make all his teammates better just by his presents on the court. But would not lead the Spurs to the playoffs if he were the best player on the Spurs roster.

I actually would put Manu around the same level as Alvin Robertson, a good to great player but he was never going to win anything while he was the best player on his team.

[Mikeanaro]

Manu can't even make an all-star game and he is supposedly better than two guys voted as top 40 in the history of the NBA.
So being good is about a popularity contest? thats the measuring stick? Even Kiwi is better than Gervin and cant make it, is Kobe a better player than Kiwi to take his spot? :lmao
Even Vince Carter gave his spot to old fat MJ, does that make VC a lesser player?




Being a spark plug off the bench is a lot easier than carrying the franchise for a decade. I love Manu and his ability to make his teammates better just by his presents, but Gervin was a franchise player, manu is just a player.
Gervin was a face of the franchise, so is DeMar DeRozan, Gordon Hayward, Carmelo but like those he never accomplished a thing except doing coke, the history makers were TD, DRob Manu Parker Bowen, the fact that Gervin kept the franchise in SA is not important since they could win in another team with another name in another city, the point is winning something not who was before and had no relationship with the success, DRob came to SA 4 years after Gervin left to steal some money in Chicago and Europe.


If Manu is your favorite player and your opinion is he is the greatest ever, I'm fine, it's your opinion, but if you compare body of work Gervin is light years ahead of everyone outside of Tim and DRob.
I would love to see Gervin carrying his NT to something or even winning something in Europe

¨The last NBA game of Gervin's career was Jordan's 63 point game against the Boston Celtics in the playoffs on April 20, 1986. Gervin recorded 1 assist and 1 personal foul in five minutes of play for the Bulls¨

Light years ahead I guess...

[Kawhitstorm]

Yes, Gervin's resume is undoubtedly much more impressive than anyone outside of Duncan/Robinson...but when I judge players, I judge them almost solely on their impact on the court. Accolades are great and all, but they can often be flawed and aren't the best indicator of just how much a player helps their team. If you look at Kobe's body of work, you could easily argue that he's as good or maybe even better than Duncan. However practically anyone who's watched both of them play over the years and is knowledgeable about basketball will tell you that Duncan is clearly better than Kobe.

Manu doesn't have the gaudy numbers that Gervin does, but he's consistently had some absolutely massive impact on his teams. Even at 38 years old, he comes in the game and just immediately changes the way his team looks and plays. I have no doubts that if he were on another team where he played 35+ mpg and started, he would've been a perennial all-star and All-NBA player. Manu is better at making those around him better compared to Gervin, and I also think he's a noticeably better defender than Gervin ever was.

So you're telling me that you would take Manu over Durant?:downspin:

[Kawhitstorm]

Gervin was a face of the franchise, so is DeMar DeRozan, Gordon Hayward, Carmelo

Iceman finished 2nd in MVP voting TWICE something none of those player have ever accomplished you fuckin' coke head. Durant is the modern day Gervin & he couldn't get out of the 2nd rd when Westbrook was injured despite having Ibaka/Kevin Martin/Reggie Jackson against a Memphis squad that got swept by the Spurs.

Outside of Gervin, no guard in NBA history has averaged 30+ pts & shot 50% from the field TWICE besides Michael fuckin' Jordan.:rolleyes

[Mikeanaro]

Iceman finished 2nd in MVP voting TWICE something none of those player have ever accomplished you fuckin' coke head. Durant is the modern day Gervin & he couldn't get out of the 2nd rd when Westbrook was injured despite having Ibaka/Kevin Martin/Reggie Jackson against a Memphis squad that got swept by the Spurs.

No guard in NBA history has averaged 30+ pts & shot 50% from the field TWICE besides Michael fuckin' Jordan.:rolleyes
It really says nothing you spoiled african prince, like your Durant dick riding fascination.

:lmao Comparing Manu with that old finished dog, all that whistle flash just to kiss Lebron´s ass.

Just thinking about KD at 38 makes me :lmao

http://sternfanblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/beetlejuice.jpg

[Cry Havoc]

Someone putting Manu ahead of DRob makes this entire thread worth reading. It's not even worth quoting because it's so terrible but damn if Spurstalk isn't entertaining at times.

[Kawhitstorm]

It really says nothing you spoiled african prince, like your Durant dick riding fascination.

:lmao Comparing Manu with that old finished dog, all that whistle flash just to kiss Lebron´s ass.

Just thinking about KD at 38 makes me :lmao

http://sternfanblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/beetlejuice.jpg

http://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2014/01/30/16/neanderthalAP.jpg

[tmtcsc]

LOL not to give away my age, but my first Spurs game was against the St Louis Spirits. ABA Red, White, and Blue ball.

Tony shouldn't be in the conversation. Manu has an argument. I'm not basing my opinion just on stats because Manu came off the bench most of his career. That didn't mean the guy in front of him was better by any stretch of the imagination. Also, DRbob and Gervin were the focal points of the offense for most of their careers. If Manu played a Harden type of role on a lesser team, his stats would have been much, much better.

If I had to pick one of those 3 players to roll with in a do-or-die game, I'm taking Manu over Gervin and Robinson. This is not meant to disrespect Ice or DRob but Manu was the fiercer competitor in my opinion and helped put his team over the top.

[DPG21920]

Look, I get the ICE never had a great team argument. I also get that Manu/TP had Duncan. But let's not so casually dismiss winning. If DPG fluked out and won a single title then faded off, I could understand. But we are talking about 15 years of unprecedented success in the best era of basketball ever.

To dismiss that is beyond disrespectful Imo. I'm not punishing Manu & TP because they had Tim & sacrificed a lot of personal accolades to win. That adds to them as a Spur, it does not detract. I'm not sure the Spurs, or any franchise will see the level of excellence we've seen ushered in by DPG ever again.

Just like its somewhat of a cop out to say Ice "didn't have to focus on defense" it's a cop out to point to individual accolades when Manu/TP sacrificed to win over and over and over again. I don't like dealing in hypotheticals because it's tough. Could Ice have been a role player on multiple title teams? Would he be willing to sacrifice? Would he play defense "if he had to"?

I don't know. I do know for a fact that both Manu & TP absolutely proved they could win. They adapted every single time they had to in order to keep winning too. I'm not discounting winning.

[Pauleta14]

1 - Timmy
2 - DRob
3a - TP
3b - Manu
3c - Ice

[skulls138]

So you're telling me that you would take Manu over Durant?:downspin:Prime vs prime? Easily. Durants got the scoring talent but Manu has everything else and the offensive talent isnt even that big of a gap.

[Spurs 4 The Win]

I get sick of reading all the posts disrespecting Gervin. Just because Gervin wasn't a part of the Duncan era doesn't make him any less impressive or great. If you so called fans can't even respect the Spurs history, don't expect anyone else to.

Gervin is a clear cut number 3 over Manu and Parker, its just a bunch of teenagers who dont know shit about our teams history

[ElNono]

Look, I get the ICE never had a great team argument. I also get that Manu/TP had Duncan. But let's not so casually dismiss winning. If DPG fluked out and won a single title then faded off, I could understand. But we are talking about 15 years of unprecedented success in the best era of basketball ever.

To dismiss that is beyond disrespectful Imo. I'm not punishing Manu & TP because they had Tim & sacrificed a lot of personal accolades to win. That adds to them as a Spur, it does not detract. I'm not sure the Spurs, or any franchise will see the level of excellence we've seen ushered in by DPG ever again.

Just like its somewhat of a cop out to say Ice "didn't have to focus on defense" it's a cop out to point to individual accolades when Manu/TP sacrificed to win over and over and over again. I don't like dealing in hypotheticals because it's tough. Could Ice have been a role player on multiple title teams? Would he be willing to sacrifice? Would he play defense "if he had to"?

I don't know. I do know for a fact that both Manu & TP absolutely proved they could win. They adapted every single time they had to in order to keep winning too. I'm not discounting winning.

That's how I feel and you can add Pop, and to an extent RC/Holt to that list, tbh... again, if you're looking at this through the "individual accolades" lens, then sure, they don't stack-up (although Manu particularly has some historical stuff under his belt under FIBA).

But if you look at this through the winning culture of the franchise, and raising this franchise not just past the "survival" level, but to the NBA's model franchise level, it's difficult to argue they're not at the very top.

[Vito Corleone]

So being good is about a popularity contest? thats the measuring stick? Even Kiwi is better than Gervin and cant make it, is Kobe a better player than Kiwi to take his spot? :lmao
Even Vince Carter gave his spot to old fat MJ, does that make VC a lesser player?



Gervin was a face of the franchise, so is DeMar DeRozan, Gordon Hayward, Carmelo but like those he never accomplished a thing except doing coke, the history makers were TD, DRob Manu Parker Bowen, the fact that Gervin kept the franchise in SA is not important since they could win in another team with another name in another city, the point is winning something not who was before and had no relationship with the success, DRob came to SA 4 years after Gervin left to steal some money in Chicago and Europe.


I would love to see Gervin carrying his NT to something or even winning something in Europe

¨The last NBA game of Gervin's career was Jordan's 63 point game against the Boston Celtics in the playoffs on April 20, 1986. Gervin recorded 1 assist and 1 personal foul in five minutes of play for the Bulls¨

Light years ahead I guess...

The last NBA game for Jordan was a meaningless non-playoff game for the Washington Wizards, but I guess that means he wasn't the greatest to ever play the game.

Congrats you just made my ignore list.


Gervin is a clear cut number 3 over Manu and Parker, its just a bunch of teenagers who dont know shit about our teams history

BINGO

[DPG21920]

Ya - I sound like a teenager :rolleyes

[Mikeanaro]

That Vito Barzini is an asshole, and not very italian by the way.

[Kawhitstorm]

Prime vs prime? Easily. Durants got the scoring talent but Manu has everything else and the offensive talent isnt even that big of a gap.

Manu wasn't so hot when he had to go up against an elite perimeter defender: Ron Artest (2006 playoffs):lol

[skulls138]

And Kawhi slowed Lebron, Lebron slowed Harden so whats your point? I didnt say Manu was invincible.

[spurraider21]

Look, I get the ICE never had a great team argument. I also get that Manu/TP had Duncan. But let's not so casually dismiss winning. If DPG fluked out and won a single title then faded off, I could understand. But we are talking about 15 years of unprecedented success in the best era of basketball ever.

To dismiss that is beyond disrespectful Imo. I'm not punishing Manu & TP because they had Tim & sacrificed a lot of personal accolades to win. That adds to them as a Spur, it does not detract. I'm not sure the Spurs, or any franchise will see the level of excellence we've seen ushered in by DPG ever again.

Just like its somewhat of a cop out to say Ice "didn't have to focus on defense" it's a cop out to point to individual accolades when Manu/TP sacrificed to win over and over and over again. I don't like dealing in hypotheticals because it's tough. Could Ice have been a role player on multiple title teams? Would he be willing to sacrifice? Would he play defense "if he had to"?

I don't know. I do know for a fact that both Manu & TP absolutely proved they could win. They adapted every single time they had to in order to keep winning too. I'm not discounting winning.
speaking of hypos we know gervin was a multiple time scoring champ, leading a team to playoff births and winning records. those are bigger accomplishments than being good #2 or #3 offensive options imo

[skulls138]

speaking of hypos we know gervin was a multiple time scoring champ, leading a team to playoff births and winning records. those are bigger accomplishments than being good #2 or #3 offensive options imoBut of four championships. Theres only one ball with three hall of fame players

[barbacoataco]

speaking of hypos we know gervin was a multiple time scoring champ, leading a team to playoff births and winning records. those are bigger accomplishments than being good #2 or #3 offensive options imo

Agree. Bottom line a lot of fans don't know history. Gervin was one of the top 2-3 players in the NBA. That's what fininshing 2nd in MVP voting twice means. He led teams to success, but lost close battles to great teams in the playoffs. And he didn't play in the ancient past. He played at a great period in the NBA.

Another way to look at this. As good as Duncan was in his prime, if he had a player as dominant offensively as Gervin next to him, he would have won even more rings.

Think of the top 3 offensive players in the NBA, like Curry, James and Durant, and that is Gervin. So what he wasn't a great defender. Neither were a lot of great players.

[barbacoataco]

I would say that Manu is one of the hardest players to rank or compare against other greats. He never played as many minutes as most, and often had nagging injuries or seemed less than full strength. In 2005 he really played like a real stud and that was his peak imo. And he's always been a guy who can do something great or terrible at any moment. Who else plays with such abandon, on the edge of greatness and failure at all times?
Still, advanced stats show that he's one of the most efficient players of all time. Very unique player and one of the greats. Go Spurs

[spurraider21]

But of four championships. Theres only one ball with three hall of fame players
i think you need an extraordinarily strong case for a 2nd/3rd option to rank higher than a guy who was a successful #1 option. i'm a huge manu fan (have had the same avatar since i joined this site), but i dont think its the case here

[ElNono]

i think you need an extraordinarily strong case for a 2nd/3rd option to rank higher than a guy who was a successful #1 option. i'm a huge manu fan (have had the same avatar since i joined this site), but i dont think its the case here

When he was the clear cut #1 option, he won. Sure, it wasn't the NBA, so the comparison doesn't necessarily match, but also makes you wonder what he would have looked like as a #1 in the NBA (shorter career for sure, IMO).

But then this is where DPG's comment comes in. He embraced a lesser role to win and he won a lot. That's a credit to him, not a slight, tbh...

[skulls138]

i think you need an extraordinarily strong case for a 2nd/3rd option to rank higher than a guy who was a successful #1 option. i'm a huge manu fan (have had the same avatar since i joined this site), but i dont think its the case herePart of the equation though. Gervin gets points for being the primary talent on his team by far (though Artis Gilmour was an All Star) AND taking them to the playoffs true but we're talking FOUR championships and currently being a contributing part one of two of the best team in the NBA. Manu has proven through winning the gold medal that its no fluke and just a product of the system.

[barbacoataco]

Also the Spurs in 1979 lost a heartbreaker 7 game series with a lot if controversial officiating against the Bullets in the Conference Finals. They were literally within a shot if being in the Finals with a good chance of winning.
So Gervin came very close to leading a team to a championship as the #1 option.

[ElNono]

Another way to look at this. As good as Duncan was in his prime, if he had a player as dominant offensively as Gervin next to him, he would have won even more rings.

Top heavy doesn't always translate though. Plenty of examples (KD/Westbrook, James/Wade/Bosh losing 2 Finals, Harden/Howard, even going back Tim/DRob only got one). You need those other guys that do the other little things and translate to wins.

From a pure offensive talent standpoint, there's no doubt Gervin was superior. From a winning, elevating the franchise to excellence standpoint, that's more debatable.

[Mikeanaro]

Lol retards claiming Gervin was the best thing ever, any clown can pad stats and accomplish nothing, but I forgive you all, tbh.

[spurraider21]

When he was the clear cut #1 option, he won. Sure, it wasn't the NBA, so the comparison doesn't necessarily match, but also makes you wonder what he would have looked like as a #1 in the NBA (shorter career for sure, IMO).

But then this is where DPG's comment comes in. He embraced a lesser role to win and he won a lot. That's a credit to him, not a slight, tbh...
lol necessarily

/chump

[spurraider21]

i love that manu accepted a role to win, but does that make him better than every #1 option legend who never rang? is he better than malone too?

[steeledl]

... Did someone really compare Manu to durant? This is why we can't have reasonable conversations here.... Too much emotion and bias. The rest of he unbiased NBA world would shit all over you.

[313]

Think youre SERIOUSLY downplaying Manus role in getting ring number 5. He was the the second MVP behind Kawhi in that series and dont forget his last second shot against OKC. It was that shot that made Spurs seem invincible....which they then became. Love Parker, who I am now calling mini-Hakeem, but pick Manu over him.
Duncan should get just as much credit on that 3 Manu hit against OKC tbh most obvious moving screen I can remember

[ElNono]

i love that manu accepted a role to win, but does that make him better than every #1 option legend who never rang? is he better than malone too?

lol doesn't deliver on Sundays

/chump

[cjw]

Duncan should get just as much credit on that 3 Manu hit against OKC tbh most obvious moving screen I can remember

And a beautiful one at that

[ElNono]

Look, I get the ICE never had a great team argument. I also get that Manu/TP had Duncan. But let's not so casually dismiss winning. If DPG fluked out and won a single title then faded off, I could understand. But we are talking about 15 years of unprecedented success in the best era of basketball ever.

To dismiss that is beyond disrespectful Imo. I'm not punishing Manu & TP because they had Tim & sacrificed a lot of personal accolades to win. That adds to them as a Spur, it does not detract. I'm not sure the Spurs, or any franchise will see the level of excellence we've seen ushered in by DPG ever again.

Just like its somewhat of a cop out to say Ice "didn't have to focus on defense" it's a cop out to point to individual accolades when Manu/TP sacrificed to win over and over and over again. I don't like dealing in hypotheticals because it's tough. Could Ice have been a role player on multiple title teams? Would he be willing to sacrifice? Would he play defense "if he had to"?

I don't know. I do know for a fact that both Manu & TP absolutely proved they could win. They adapted every single time they had to in order to keep winning too. I'm not discounting winning.

Do you think the trend towards advanced metrics will do a service or disservice to greats like Gervin, tbh?

[DPG21920]

Do you think the trend towards advanced metrics will do a service or disservice to greats like Gervin, tbh?

Gut says it will be a very good thing. Advanced metrics are good to offensive players, especially efficient ones. The defensive advanced metrics aren't there yet so he won't get dinged.

[313]

And a beautiful one at that
:flag:

[J_Paco]

Someone putting Manu ahead of DRob makes this entire thread worth reading. It's not even worth quoting because it's so terrible but damn if Spurstalk isn't entertaining at times.

Filled with a bunch of dumbasses, really. Ginobili and Parker are great, but Duncan, Robinson and Gervin are the three best players in franchise history. Gervin was an absolute scoring machine and had the burden of carrying the franchise alone for many seasons, while Parker and Ginobili always had one another, and to a much larger degree Duncan, to lean on.

[Aztecfan03]

When he was the clear cut #1 option, he won. Sure, it wasn't the NBA, so the comparison doesn't necessarily match, but also makes you wonder what he would have looked like as a #1 in the NBA (shorter career for sure, IMO).

But then this is where DPG's comment comes in. He embraced a lesser role to win and he won a lot. That's a credit to him, not a slight, tbh...

a credit to him as a person but not a credit (or discredit) to how good of a basketball player he was.

[Aztecfan03]

Part of the equation though. Gervin gets points for being the primary talent on his team by far (though Artis Gilmour was an All Star) AND taking them to the playoffs true but we're talking FOUR championships and currently being a contributing part one of two of the best team in the NBA. Manu has proven through winning the gold medal that its no fluke and just a product of the system.

So Robert Horry is better than all 3 of them, right? SEVEN RINGS!

[Mikeanaro]

So Robert Horry is better than all 3 of them, right? SEVEN RINGS!
Robert Horry was an elite role player, had the balls at key moments and made big shots, why are you bringing him into the conversation? Gervin was a coke bum, period.

[will_spurs]

Again, if we're ranking these players based on raw output and talent, then obviously Gervin is better than Tony and Manu. There's no discussion there.

But my point (and I suspect others') is that since we're ranking them according to their importance for the Spurs franchise, then things get muddled a bit. Gervin made the Spurs relevant after the merger, and probably contribued to the franchise staying in SA. But Tony and Manu are part of the winningest trio in the NBA, at a level of sustained excellence never seen in any American pro sport, also main contributors to 4 championships, and are not in any way, shape or form role players.

That's why I'd give them the nod as 3a/3b in terms of All-Time Spurs, even though they are not individually as good as Ice.

[ElNono]

a credit to him as a person but not a credit (or discredit) to how good of a basketball player he was.

Absolutely. If we're talking raw physical talent, skill and individual accolades alone, there's a plethora of players much better, including Gervin.


Again, if we're ranking these players based on raw output and talent, then obviously Gervin is better than Tony and Manu. There's no discussion there.

But my point (and I suspect others') is that since we're ranking them according to their importance for the Spurs franchise, then things get muddled a bit. Gervin made the Spurs relevant after the merger, and probably contribued to the franchise staying in SA. But Tony and Manu are part of the winningest trio in the NBA, at a level of sustained excellence never seen in any American pro sport, also main contributors to 4 championships, and are not in any way, shape or form role players.

That's why I'd give them the nod as 3a/3b in terms of All-Time Spurs, even though they are not individually as good as Ice.

bingo

And personally I'm not badmouthing Ice... no matter where you put him, he's definitely franchise top 5.

[DPG21920]

The logic has already been explained - old heads just get grumpy and confused (since those arguing for TP Manu are teenagers)

[skulls138]

So Robert Horry is better than all 3 of them, right? SEVEN RINGS!If you want to say that then I could compare Gervin to Iverson and we know that despite Iversons talent his style of play is anti-team and doesnt produce championships. On the contrary his style of play takes away from the potential contributions of his teammates.

[barbacoataco]

If you want to say that then I could compare Gervin to Iverson and we know that despite Iversons talent his style of play is anti-team and doesnt produce championships. On the contrary his style of play takes away from the potential contributions of his teammates.

Comparing G to Iverson is absurd. Gervin was a high % shooter who also got to the line a lot. Also, for the umpteenth time, his team were good teams that won a lot of games, often winning their division, making deep runs in the playoffs etc. Just because they came up a hair short doesn't make him a "loser" or his career worthless.

Look at the list of all-time too 10 Point guards and you'll see several guys who never won championships. While I do think it's a big factor in comparing greats and making lists, it's a little too much sometimes. Everyone is all up Steve Nash's nutsack when talking all time PG's, and he never won a championship.

If you're a younger person that wasn't around at the time, spend a few minutes on basketball-reference and educate yourself before forming opinions.

[Kawhitstorm]

If you want to say that then I could compare Gervin to Iverson and we know that despite Iversons talent his style of play is anti-team and doesnt produce championships. On the contrary his style of play takes away from the potential contributions of his teammates.

Again the closest thing to Gervin is Durant; even Carmelo isn't as good as Ice.

[will_spurs]

Comparing G to Iverson is absurd. Gervin was a high % shooter who also got to the line a lot. Also, for the umpteenth time, his team were good teams that won a lot of games, often winning their division, making deep runs in the playoffs etc. Just because they came up a hair short doesn't make him a "loser" or his career worthless.

Maybe you don't remember who Iverson was... he brought his team to the Finals, was MVP once, his scoring average is higher than Gervin's (but he was clearly a much worse shooter), and what he loses in rebounds he gains in assists. He was no slouch (and here I am defending a player I dislike).

[Kawhitstorm]

Maybe you don't remember who Iverson was... he brought his team to the Finals, was MVP once, his scoring average is higher than Gervin's (but he was clearly a much worse shooter), and what he loses in rebounds he gains in assists. He was no slouch (and here I am defending a player I dislike).

Iverson is a 1st ballot HOFer but his game was NOTHING like Gervin's besides the fact they both led the league in scoring multiple times.:downspin:

[Gagnrath]

Top heavy doesn't always translate though. Plenty of examples (KD/Westbrook, James/Wade/Bosh losing 2 Finals, Harden/Howard, even going back Tim/DRob only got one). You need those other guys that do the other little things and translate to wins.

From a pure offensive talent standpoint, there's no doubt Gervin was superior. From a winning, elevating the franchise to excellence standpoint, that's more debatable.


DRob and Duncan got two titles together. Just so you know.

[ElNono]

DRob and Duncan got two titles together. Just so you know.

Oops, you're correct. But you know what i was going with that. Accumulation of superlative talent doesn't always translate into rings.

[Mikeanaro]

Its okay, when the judgment day comes Manu will forgive every doubter, but only after swatting their foreheads like he did to that bat of course.

[skulls138]

Comparing G to Iverson is absurd. Gervin was a high % shooter who also got to the line a lot. Also, for the umpteenth time, his team were good teams that won a lot of games, often winning their division, making deep runs in the playoffs etc. Just because they came up a hair short doesn't make him a "loser" or his career worthless.

Look at the list of all-time too 10 Point guards and you'll see several guys who never won championships. While I do think it's a big factor in comparing greats and making lists, it's a little too much sometimes. Everyone is all up Steve Nash's nutsack when talking all time PG's, and he never won a championship.

If you're a younger person that wasn't around at the time, spend a few minutes on basketball-reference and educate yourself before forming opinions.Im not necessarily picking Manu over Gervin, Im just saying people want to punish Manu for winning championships. That a champion becomes a champion by becoming selfless, making his stats less, hes not as good. We could come up with a million examples to contradict each others other examples. Look at Kobe and Shaq, who was number two there? Is either one of those two just a number two? As we can see by Manus Argentinian team beating a US team with Duncan, Manu isnt just a number 2.

[Mikeanaro]

Im not necessarily picking Manu over Gervin, Im just saying people want to punish Manu for winning championships. That a champion becomes a champion by becoming selfless, making his stats less, hes not as good. We could come up with a million examples to contradict each others other examples. Look at Kobe and Shaq, who was number two there? Is either one of those two just a number two? As we can see by Manus Argentinian team beating a US team with Duncan, Manu isnt just a number 2.
Yes but you must have in mind most of these fans love fantasy shit that transcends the game like if you have a regular season MVP you are a hall of famer and one of the best ever, if you played some in media product like the ASG you are top tier and because Manu went just 2 times he is miles away from their poster heroes, Manu is there to win no matter what he is not about inflating stats thats why some want that fantasy illusion about certain player scoring like hell and playing little D and if that player were with our current Spurs he could win like 32 championships, they cant even understand in their tiny minds that winning Spurs dont have one main scorer thats why Aldridge dipped his stats here when he is a great scorer in any other team... fantasy minds, Spurs dont have one main gun thats the beauty but yet the ¨puristic¨ Spur Fan thinks Gervin would score 40 points a night playing with Duncan and company while winning everything avaiable.

[will_spurs]

Iverson is a 1st ballot HOFer but his game was NOTHING like Gervin's besides the fact they both led the league in scoring multiple times.:downspin:

That's exactly what we're getting at: Iverson was a superior talent without a ring, much like Gervin. They have much in common in terms of achievements.

[skulls138]

Yes but you must have in mind most of these fans love fantasy shit that transcends the game like if you have a regular season MVP you are a hall of famer and one of the best ever, if you played some in media product like the ASG you are top tier and because Manu went just 2 times he is miles away from their poster heroes, Manu is there to win no matter what he is not about inflating stats thats why some want that fantasy illusion about certain player scoring like hell and playing little D and if that player were with our current Spurs he could win like 32 championships, they cant even understand in their tiny minds that winning Spurs dont have one main scorer thats why Aldridge dipped his stats here when he is a great scorer in any other team... fantasy minds, Spurs dont have one main gun thats the beauty but yet the ¨puristic¨ Spur Fan thinks Gervin would score 40 points a night playing with Duncan and company while winning everything avaiable.Not comparing Spurs fans to what Im about to say but it reminds me of what Durant had to say about Kawhi being a "system" player. If I was on his team and read that my heart would sink because I would see that much of my efforts are in vein because of that kind of thinking.

[Aztecfan03]

Again, if we're ranking these players based on raw output and talent, then obviously Gervin is better than Tony and Manu. There's no discussion there.

But my point (and I suspect others') is that since we're ranking them according to their importance for the Spurs franchise, then things get muddled a bit. Gervin made the Spurs relevant after the merger, and probably contribued to the franchise staying in SA. But Tony and Manu are part of the winningest trio in the NBA, at a level of sustained excellence never seen in any American pro sport, also main contributors to 4 championships, and are not in any way, shape or form role players.

That's why I'd give them the nod as 3a/3b in terms of All-Time Spurs, even though they are not individually as good as Ice.

ANd that's where the disagreeement is coming from i think. I don't think best spur means their importance to the franchise but how good they were in their playing career with the spurs. Strictly talking about best basketball players but only looking at time that was spent in a Spurs uniform.

[Gagnrath]

ANd that's where the disagreeement is coming from i think. I don't think best spur means their importance to the franchise but how good they were in their playing career with the spurs. Strictly talking about best basketball players but only looking at time that was spent in a Spurs uniform.

And I could argue that we could also use the player with overall talent that was also a Spur. No matter where their basketball peak was played we are ranking player greatness amoung players who were also spurs. We need to agree on what exactly we're discussing before we can ever hope to have a comprehensive list that makes everyone happy.

[skulls138]

ANd that's where the disagreeement is coming from i think. I don't think best spur means their importance to the franchise but how good they were in their playing career with the spurs. Strictly talking about best basketball players but only looking at time that was spent in a Spurs uniform.That and not counting rings as part of that equation, right?

[Aztecfan03]

rings don't count all that much considering they are a team accomplishment and manu and Gervin had VASTLY different teams in terms of talent.

[Aztecfan03]

And I could argue that we could also use the player with overall talent that was also a Spur. No matter where their basketball peak was played we are ranking player greatness amoung players who were also spurs. We need to agree on what exactly we're discussing before we can ever hope to have a comprehensive list that makes everyone happy.
In this case, the careers were pretty much all with the spurs anyways(unless you are counting international and if so lol)

My point is best spur should be how good they were, particularly as a Spur. It shouldn't be what impact you had on the organization.

[will_spurs]

In this case, the careers were pretty much all with the spurs anyways(unless you are counting international and if so lol)

My point is best spur should be how good they were, particularly as a Spur. It shouldn't be what impact you had on the organization.

Who cares if they were Spurs if they had no impact on the franchise or organization?

[spursistan]

"The greatest for me to see is how he has developed into a pillar of the organization-- second to probably only to Tim and David" ..:stirpot:

831885365745164289



No internet pictures available of Laura Messina, Ettore's wife, but there could be trouble ahead in Spursnation if she is turns out to be one of those bangable Italian milfs.

[wildbill2u]

I'm a huuuuge fan of Manu, but George Gervin saved the Spurs. His great entertainment value due to his very special skills in shooting built the fan base in a town that had no history with any interest in basketball at all. The enthusiastic fan base meant financial survival and ultimately led to the Spurs being one of the ABA teams that entered the NBA.

[SAGirl]

Interesting tidbit about Gervin Bill... bc back then the ABA was in very a rickety situation. I have read some tales...

[Mikeanaro]

Lol Gervin over Manu... just because he was the face of the franchise deserves a #1 spot(0 accomplishments), let alone the coke thing...
Spurs could be on another city and win championships with Duncan, Manu, Drob and the other guys.

[Arcadian]

*fourth

[dabom]

Watch out messina. Tony a fucking diva. :lol

[gambit1990]

harden, kd, messina giving manu props recently.

[UZER]

I wish I could give Manu recent props but his play won't let me.

[Pocho La Pantera]

I wish I could give Manu recent props but his play won't let me. he is a former player trying to help the team in very reduced minutes. You have to appreciate the farewell and enjoy his last few months as a player.

[ElNono]

harden, kd, messina giving manu props recently.

what did MVHarden say?

[gambit1990]

what did MVHarden say?
when he was asked if there's ever been anyone else like him, he said manu.

over the summer he also said manu is his favorite lefty of all time.

[apalisoc_9]

But Gervin can twist his wrist more elegantly :cry

[Gagnrath]

In this case, the careers were pretty much all with the spurs anyways(unless you are counting international and if so lol)

My point is best spur should be how good they were, particularly as a Spur. It shouldn't be what impact you had on the organization.

If we do things that way Michael Finley, Tracy McGrady, and Dennis Rodman all rank higher than Bruce Bowen. I am not exactly willing to do that. It's also puts Horry and Kerr in weird places because they weren't exactly pillars of the Spurs but can be argued as hall of fame players that were key to spurs championship runs.

[dbestpro]

Gervin gets over looked because too many never seen him play. Point is if there was never a George Gervin the Spurs would not have stayed in San Antonio.

[tonight...you]

"The greatest for me to see is how he has developed into a pillar of the organization-- second to probably only to Tim and David" ..:stirpot:

831885365745164289



No internet pictures available of Laura Messina, Ettore's wife, but there could be trouble ahead in Spursnation if she is turns out to be one of those bangable Italian milfs.
https://www.xing.com/image/3_e_f_8ab1fdee5_19473203_3/laura-messina-foto.1024x1024.jpg

TP's body is ready...

[tonight...you]

But Gervin can twist his wrist more elegantly :cry
Like you've watched him and his teams...

[Mikeanaro]

Gervin gets over looked because too many never seen him play. Point is if there was never a George Gervin the Spurs would not have stayed in San Antonio.
They could be anywhere, in Tupelo, Des Moines or in Dover and still be the Spurs winning championships...

[dbestpro]

They could be anywhere, in Tupelo, Des Moines or in Dover and still be the Spurs winning championships...
Disagree. If they had moved the name Spurs would not have followed. Without Gervin the ABA team most likely to go to the NBA would have been St Louis and the team would have been called the Spirit.

[Mikeanaro]

Disagree. If they had moved the name Spurs would not have followed. Without Gervin the ABA team most likely to go to the NBA would have been St Louis and the team would have been called the Spirit.
Who knows? Grizzlies are still Grizzlies, there are no Lakes in LA, if we go to the ¨pay respect¨ route it will be
1- Gervin
2- David Robinson because thanks to his injury Spurs got TD
3- Tim Duncan because he arrived late
4 and the rest Manu Parker etc.

[ElNono]

when he was asked if there's ever been anyone else like him, he said manu.

over the summer he also said manu is his favorite lefty of all time.

:tu