I love Tony and all, but how much better would Duncan be if....

[TurnNiggazDreams2Flames]

He had a true PG, not a shooting PG. I'm talking about a Ridnour, Kidd, Nash, Stockton, even Brevin Knight. Despite the fact that I like Parker better than any of these players, Duncan might be better off.

In no way do I want a trade or any shit like that--- this is more of just a "what if" thing.

Thoughts?

[SequSpur]

Kidd, Nash and Stockton... maybe.......

But Ridnour and Brevin Knight? No frickin way.

Tony Parker is a point guard and one of the best in the league. By the end of this year or next year, he will be the best. No doubts about it.

Tony Parker may become so big, little SA might not be able to keep him.

[ZStomp]

Tony Parker may become so big, little SA might not be able to keep him.

How so?

[Amuseddaysleeper]

tony parker is a good player but until he can find a way to make himself somewhat useful when teams pack the lanes against him he's never gonna be the best pg in the league. i like the guy a lot and he's shown tremendous improvement but when the lakers beat us 4 straights game during the .4 series and this last game against chicago..you pack the lanes against TP and you stop TP. he isnt much of a playmaker as people think. he's great at penetrating but a lot of times he over penetrates

[SA210]

^^^ you're right about stopping Parker if you pack the lanes. That's why TP needs to really develop that outside shot. He needs to get it down almost deadly. I know he will do it. When he does, he will then be unstoppable.

[TDMVPDPOY]

tony parker is a good player but until he can find a way to make himself somewhat useful when teams pack the lanes against him he's never gonna be the best pg in the league. i like the guy a lot and he's shown tremendous improvement but when the lakers beat us 4 straights game during the .4 series and this last game against chicago..you pack the lanes against TP and you stop TP. he isnt much of a playmaker as people think. he's great at penetrating but a lot of times he over penetrates

This is what i said in other forums and also agree upon on, this guy is fuckn shit when other teams clog up the lane. His got no other game to his repitoure, also if brent barry can penetrate the lane like kidd/nash then in my mind he be very good as a pure pg, too bad he doesnt do any of that, but still pretty good.
Ive seen sum dvd games when brent runs the offense the team plays more smoother and setting up their game plans n shit, unlike parker who likes to play 1 on 5 fastest down the court gets a free layup and misses flop and complain, or when he fails to outbound when stuck in traffic looks at the other player as if its there fault for not catchin the ball.

trade parker to NO for chris paul :D or to the wolves in a package for KG.

[Dartherus]

tony parker is a good player but until he can find a way to make himself somewhat useful when teams pack the lanes against him he's never gonna be the best pg in the league. i like the guy a lot and he's shown tremendous improvement but when the lakers beat us 4 straights game during the .4 series and this last game against chicago..you pack the lanes against TP and you stop TP. he isnt much of a playmaker as people think. he's great at penetrating but a lot of times he over penetrates

This is what i said in other forums and also agree upon on, this guy is fuckn shit when other teams clog up the lane. His got no other game to his repitoure, also if brent barry can penetrate the lane like kidd/nash then in my mind he be very good as a pure pg, too bad he doesnt do any of that, but still pretty good.
Ive seen sum dvd games when brent runs the offense the team plays more smoother and setting up their game plans n shit, unlike parker who likes to play 1 on 5 fastest down the court gets a free layup and misses flop and complain, or when he fails to outbound when stuck in traffic looks at the other player as if its there fault for not catchin the ball.

trade parker to NO for chris paul :D or to the wolves in a package for KG.
Sad but accurate both posts, Parker has great speed and dribbling, but due to his very limited resources and limited basketball IQ, he becomes too predictable...his lack of court vision and tempo handling are too awful for any PG, and it's worse the case when he's the starting PG of the NBA champion, don't you think?.

[xcoriate]

you guys are idiots

[Dartherus]

you guys are idiots
If you're against the opinions, why don't you debunk them with rational arguments and explanations based basketball knowledge, instead of just posting insults?

[exstatic]

How so?

His contract will expire when he's 28. Holt balked at paying him $66M for 6 years. He'll be worth more than that next time.

[travis2]

Well, he would if there were any "rational arguments and explanations based basketball knowledge" (whatever the hell that is...your grammar needs work) to debunk.

Instead you (and the others he's referring to) just seem to make things up as you go along.

"Limited resources"? "Limited basketball IQ"? "Lack of court vision and tempo handling"? Where the hell does that come from? Or is it true just because you say so?

I always laugh when someone posts an unsupported argument and then demands someone try to prove him wrong...when he hasn't given any evidence that he's right to begin with. Sorry...that's not how "rational arguments" are conducted.

[kskonn]

Well, he would if there were any "rational arguments and explanations based basketball knowledge" (whatever the hell that is...your grammar needs work) to debunk.

Instead you (and the others he's referring to) just seem to make things up as you go along.

"Limited resources"? "Limited basketball IQ"? "Lack of court vision and tempo handling"? Where the hell does that come from? Or is it true just because you say so?

I always laugh when someone posts an unsupported argument and then demands someone try to prove him wrong...when he hasn't given any evidence that he's right to begin with. Sorry...that's not how "rational arguments" are conducted.

nice!! ownage!!

[Dartherus]

Well, he would if there were any "rational arguments and explanations based basketball knowledge" (whatever the hell that is...your grammar needs work) to debunk.
It should be "based on basketball knowledge"...however...We are here to discuss about BASKETBALL, NOT GRAMMAR.


"Limited resources"? "Limited basketball IQ"? "Lack of court vision and tempo handling"? Where the hell does that come from? Or is it true just because you say so?
If you lack BASIC basketball knowlegde to understand such concepts, how come you want to enter into these kind of discussions?

Why don't you learn some basic fundamentals of strategy/tactics of basketball? this way, perhaps in the future, you'll understand that basketball is a little more than just evaluating players by their pure scoring?

[101A]

O.K.

I will try to debunk your case with your level of accumen...

Here goes:

Tony Parker HAS good court vision and DOES NOT have low basketball IQ.

That was tough.

[Dartherus]

O.K.
I will try to debunk your case with your level of accumen...
Here goes:
Tony Parker HAS good court vision and DOES NOT have low basketball IQ.

That was tough.
perhaps he has decent court vision and basketball IQ (good would be an exageration) if you compare him with all nba players of different positions, however talking about POINT_GUARDS, I seriously doubt that his court vision, basketball IQ and tempo management can be considered 'good'.

Anyway, in case you doubt of my opinion (something reasonable, cause you don't know me), ask any experienced basketball coach you know, ask him about this issue, and tell us the output analysis you get this way...

[travis2]

It should be "based on basketball knowledge"...however...We are here to discuss about BASKETBALL, NOT GRAMMAR.


If you lack BASIC basketball knowlegde to understand such concepts, how come you want to enter into these kind of discussions?

Why don't you learn some basic fundamentals of strategy/tactics of basketball? this way, perhaps in the future, you'll understand that basketball is a little more than just evaluating players by their pure scoring?

:lmao

First of all...if you are incapable of the attention to detail necessary to correctly construct a sentence (which really isn't that hard), why should I take your "knowledge" seriously?

Secondly...once again, you make unsupported assertions and expect others to debunk them for you. To wit...you assume I am merely evaluating Parker by his scoring line. Also, and even more important, you implicitly claim knowledge of "basic fundamentals of strategy/tactics of basketball" while also denying that I possess any such knowledge. You haven't proven that either.

I do like 101A's response. It contains all the knowledge and support your original post did. Rational, succinct, and equally logical. :tu

[101A]

Dartherus is funny....

D.Us: Tony Parker has no Court Vision.

Me: Tony Parker has Court Vision.

D. Us: O.K. Tony Parker has decent court vision.

It's Lincoln-Douglas all over again!

[Dartherus]

:lmao
First of all...if you are incapable of the attention to detail necessary to correctly construct a sentence (which really isn't that hard), why should I take your "knowledge" seriously?
First, when you write at chat speed, you can't ask to have perfect grammar (not everybody has as their main activity during the day to post correct grammar in spurts Forum, some people has extra-spurs activities)


Secondly...once again, you make unsupported assertions and expect others to debunk them for you. To wit...you assume I am merely evaluating Parker by his scoring line. Also, and even more important, you implicitly claim knowledge of "basic fundamentals of strategy/tactics of basketball" while also denying that I possess any such knowledge. You haven't proven that either.

I do like 101A's response. It contains all the knowledge and support your original post did. Rational, succinct, and equally logical. :tu
What 'support' do you need? tons of lines would be useless if Parker ON COURT showed the opposite....you can see him uncapable of managing static attack, to control the tempo, he's a great road runner and finisher, but handling the tempo? when was the last time you saw parker doing that? in the latest playoffs, against the bulls? care to explain me?

Same with his court vision, how many times a game you see him making great assists involving extremedly high Basketball IQ...

the absense of such plays is notorious...
it's like when people say god, fairies or werewolves exists (in this case you're saying Great Courtvision and tempo handling on TP exists)...you can't prove a negative, the only thing you can do is showing the lack of evidences of the existance....

In this case, I see lack of games were TP shows great courtvision, lack of games were TP made a great handling of the tempo....and of course you can prove me wrong if you show me games were TP did a great job with the tempo handling and the courtivision, I'd be pleased to be presented such evidences...will you do it?

[Dartherus]

Dartherus is funny....

D.Us: Tony Parker has no Court Vision.

Me: Tony Parker has Court Vision.

D. Us: O.K. Tony Parker has decent court vision.

It's Lincoln-Douglas all over again!

Perhaps if you'd learned to read&comprehend when you were a kid, you'd noticed the "for any point guard" part of my first post.... ;-)

[Pistons < Spurs]

Tony Parker is a point guard and one of the best in the league. By the end of this year or next year, he will be the best. No doubts about it.




:lmao :lmao :lmao :rollin :rollin

[san antonio spurs]

Dartherus is funny....

D.Us: Tony Parker has no Court Vision.

Me: Tony Parker has Court Vision.

D. Us: O.K. Tony Parker has decent court vision.

It's Lincoln-Douglas all over again!
mega ownage
________
Live Sex Webshows (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

[easjer]

Well, I've seen games in which Tony Parker descended from the heavens into the stadium, proving himself to be a god. Also games where Pop was busy on the sidelines signing pacts in blood with Satan himself. Also, the refs were pretty fairies dancing in tutus.

If you haven't seen that, prove me wrong by describing the games you've seen that aren't like that.

Stunning argument, my limited basketball fundamentals are reeling. Also, plenty of people take the time to edit their posts. It makes you look more intelligent.

[Spurminator]

About the only flaw in Tony's game is his shooting. If he was a better shooter, that might open up the paint for Duncan a little more. But that has nothing to do with being a "true" point guard...

[NyKco]

Tony is a exelent players but , Gino and Timmy are the leaders of this team.
to remember in the final Billups I triumph with parker :rolleyes

[Dartherus]

Well, I've seen games in which Tony Parker descended from the heavens into the stadium, proving himself to be a god. Also games where Pop was busy on the sidelines signing pacts in blood with Satan himself. Also, the refs were pretty fairies dancing in tutus.

If you haven't seen that, prove me wrong by describing the games you've seen that aren't like that.

Stunning argument, my limited basketball fundamentals are reeling. Also, plenty of people take the time to edit their posts. It makes you look more intelligent.
LOGIC 101 (it seems that you must leanr not only basketball): The burden of the proof is on the side claiming the existance of something, not on the side showing the lack of evidences of existance...if you make such statements ("Pop was busy on the sidelines signing pacts in blood with Satan himself", the existence of TP courtivision and habilities to handle the tempo ;-) , it's you the one who sould prove them....not the one noticing the lack of existance of plays were TP shows great court vision ro tempo handling...that'w what you fail to get...

you can observe ABSENSE of plays, then the rebuttal would be easy, you could show me games of Tony handling the tempo quite well, or having shows of great court vision, but the one claiming absense of such skills, can only show that ABSENSE, because it's absense of such skills what I'm talking about, how could absense be 'showed', care to explain us?

[pache100]

I just love it when people come in here, guns blazing, acting all cocky and like they know everything (when all they post is OPINION)...and then are shocked when people shoot back.

It is amusing on a slow Monday morning, though.


About the only flaw in Tony's game is his shooting. If he was a better shooter, that might open up the paint for Duncan a little more. But that has nothing to do with being a "true" point guard...

Precisely. And Pop is happy with Tony more than he's not happy with him these days. When that changes, we will know about it. And, as long as Tony is playing the game Pop wants him to play (no matter what the nay-sayers here think or say - they are both getting paid a hell of a lot more than any of us, I'd bet on it), I'm a happy camper.

[easjer]

So looking at tapes is a waste of time? How do you show the absence of things? Quite simple - you look at what is there and then look at the play that was drawn up or footage of what you think should be there and examine what is missing. Who was in the wrong place on the rotation? Where was the ball supposed to be.

What seems to be missing here is that your statements cannot be validated because they are opinions only. You are welcome to them, but you can't do much if people think you are an idiot because of the opinions you hold. You cannot demand proof if you are not willing to provide it.

You can think I'm an utter moron because I love Tony's style of play and disagree with you entirely. I've witnessed Tony grow over the last three years, so that where he would formerly try to penetrate impetuously he now, slows down, allows the players to set and evaluates a play. Where he used to force shots or play he puts in an extra pass. Further, I've seen that where he used to look to Pop or Tim before every pass or shot, he now takes charge. I think that is maturity, and to me, evidence of his ball handling skills (which I've seen at every tempo) and court vision. Would I consider his BB IQ to be as high as say Brent Barry? No. But when he's played in the NBA for seven more years? Yes.

Disagree all you want, I'm not going to argue further with you.

As to the original post, I don't think that would help us. I like Tony's game and a 'typical' point guard would do more to push everything through Tim, which is dangerous. It can be done and will work a lot of the time, but when people figure it out (where they like to pass and stand) or when Timmy's having a bad night, your offense collapses. I like that our pg is able to diversify things and give us another top notch weapon. I like that you don't know who they will go to next. That they can switch out as necessary (when defense is crowding Parker, when they are fronting Timmy, when Manu is having a bad night). It's a real luxury.

[Marcus Bryant]

Damn. If the Spurs had a true point guard they might finally win a championship.

[ducks]

did stockton and kidd every win a damm title?

and stockton had a big man name mailman

[travis2]

So looking at tapes is a waste of time? How do you show the absence of things? Quite simple - you look at what is there and then look at the play that was drawn up or footage of what you think should be there and examine what is missing. Who was in the wrong place on the rotation? Where was the ball supposed to be.

What seems to be missing here is that your statements cannot be validated because they are opinions only. You are welcome to them, but you can't do much if people think you are an idiot because of the opinions you hold. You cannot demand proof if you are not willing to provide it.

You can think I'm an utter moron because I love Tony's style of play and disagree with you entirely. I've witnessed Tony grow over the last three years, so that where he would formerly try to penetrate impetuously he now, slows down, allows the players to set and evaluates a play. Where he used to force shots or play he puts in an extra pass. Further, I've seen that where he used to look to Pop or Tim before every pass or shot, he now takes charge. I think that is maturity, and to me, evidence of his ball handling skills (which I've seen at every tempo) and court vision. Would I consider his BB IQ to be as high as say Brent Barry? No. But when he's played in the NBA for seven more years? Yes.

Disagree all you want, I'm not going to argue further with you.

As to the original post, I don't think that would help us. I like Tony's game and a 'typical' point guard would do more to push everything through Tim, which is dangerous. It can be done and will work a lot of the time, but when people figure it out (where they like to pass and stand) or when Timmy's having a bad night, your offense collapses. I like that our pg is able to diversify things and give us another top notch weapon. I like that you don't know who they will go to next. That they can switch out as necessary (when defense is crowding Parker, when they are fronting Timmy, when Manu is having a bad night). It's a real luxury.

Now that is a post...:tu

[Marcus Bryant]

The Spurs could have Parker dominate the offense and rack up close to 10 assists a night. The question is whether or not that is in the best interest of the team. I think not.

Some of you seem incapable of judging Parker's point guard skills.

[Dartherus]

So looking at tapes is a waste of time? How do you show the absence of things? Quite simple - you look at what is there and then look at the play that was drawn up or footage of what you think should be there and examine what is missing. Who was in the wrong place on the rotation? Where was the ball supposed to be.

What seems to be missing here is that your statements cannot be validated because they are opinions only. You are welcome to them, but you can't do much if people think you are an idiot because of the opinions you hold. You cannot demand proof if you are not willing to provide it.
The explanation is simple, it is zillion times more difficult to go into game tapes looking for plays were he was missplaced or did the wrong move (however, you can remember the latest playoffs and him beeing unable to control the tempo, I'm sure you can figure out)...it's quite easier to have the best TP plays, and see if such plays are almost 100% scoring moves with penetration, and if you see such best plays selection, you'll note the absense of great court vision moves...that's what I'm talking about of how easier would be to present evidences of his great court vision, if it would exist.


You can think I'm an utter moron because I love Tony's style of play and disagree with you entirely. I've witnessed Tony grow over the last three years, so that where he would formerly try to penetrate impetuously he now, slows down, allows the players to set and evaluates a play. Where he used to force shots or play he puts in an extra pass. Further, I've seen that where he used to look to Pop or Tim before every pass or shot, he now takes charge. I think that is maturity, and to me, evidence of his ball handling skills (which I've seen at every tempo) and court vision. Would I consider his BB IQ to be as high as say Brent Barry? No. But when he's played in the NBA for seven more years? Yes.
Sorry to disagree, but about tony development, it is indrebidle that tony hasn't added things to their skillset, he's still great at dribbling and penetrating at warp speed, but his shooting neither, tempo handling or court vision hasn't improved yet...

[conqueso]

The explanation is simple, it is zillion times more difficult to go into game tapes looking for plays were he was missplaced or did the wrong move (however, you can remember the latest playoffs and him beeing unable to control the tempo, I'm sure you can figure out)...it's quite easier to have the best TP plays, and see if such plays are almost 100% scoring moves with penetration, and if you see such best plays selection, you'll note the absense of great court vision moves...that's what I'm talking about of how easier would be to present evidences of his great court vision, if it would exist.

I'm not really understanding what you mean when you say Tony doesn't have good court vision. Is it because he doesn't make no-look passes like Kidd? Or because he only averages 5.7 assists per game and isn't in the double digits like Nash or Stockton? He's very good a leading a fast break, and yes that has a lot to do with his speed and amazing ability to finish, but it also requires great court vision; he's able to see the seams in the defense and know where the trailers are and where they're going to be.

And while this point has already been made, I think it's worth repeating: Tony's decision-making has improved substantially over the last two seasons. Pop has made this observation to the media several times. Parker knows what plays to run and when to run them...Pop has admitted that he has less play-by-play control over the offense now and has turned over the reins to Parker most of the time. I can't see Pop doing this if he didn't have supreme confidence in Parker's court vision and leadership.

Tony is able to control the tempo of the game, albeit not like someone like Arenas can. He has the patience to slow down the secondary break and set up the half-court offense. He can also push the ball up the floor and beat three or four defenders to the rack. Pop has lauded him for both of these traits.

And when you see the "best TP plays" or whatever, remember that you're watching game highlights, and they aren't going to show anything that isn't scoring or flabbergasting, how-did-he-do-that passing. You won't see Parker dribbling at the top of the key for a few seconds, reading the defense, and calling a play on Sportcenter.

To say that penetrating the lane and throwing up a soft floater over two 7 foot defenders lacks court vision is to betray your lack of knowledge about the game.

[GoSpurs21]

all that matters is Duncan is all ready a 1st ballet HOFer and that the Spurs win

stats only matter to fantasy players

[pache100]

all that matters is Duncan is all ready a 1st ballet HOFer and that the Spurs win

Timmy's a dancer now?

[ducks]

no other player on the spurs other then duncan matter
waive the other players and just sign the min players

[boutons]

"ballet"

Tim does act like a Prima Donna when he bitches up and down the court about no-calls. :lol

[pache100]

Or is it true just because you say so?

There's a lot of that going on around here.


"ballet"

Tim does act like a Prima Donna when he bitches up and down the court about no-calls. :lol

Hmmm. I have never seen Tim do that. I have seen him talk to referees to clarify calls. I have even seen him openly disagree with referees on no-calls, but then he puts his head down, trots down the court and gets back to business. I have never seen him "bitch up and down the court" about anything. Perhaps you were being facetious?

[101A]

Well, I've seen games in which Tony Parker descended from the heavens into the stadium, proving himself to be a god. Also games where Pop was busy on the sidelines signing pacts in blood with Satan himself. Also, the refs were pretty fairies dancing in tutus.

If you haven't seen that, prove me wrong by describing the games you've seen that aren't like that.

Stunning argument, my limited basketball fundamentals are reeling. Also, plenty of people take the time to edit their posts. It makes you look more intelligent.

ROFL

[The Artest Factor]

Parker is strictly a scorer. He's not a play maker, not a good defender, not a good leader, and not a good rebounder. He's a poor mans Gilbert Arenas.

[easjer]

There's a lot of that going on around here.



Hmmm. I have never seen Tim do that. I have seen him talk to referees to clarify calls. I have even seen him openly disagree with referees on no-calls, but then he puts his head down, trots down the court and gets back to business. I have never seen him "bitch up and down the court" about anything. Perhaps you were being facetious?


Sadly, I have seen Tim do that. Not often, certainly not every night, but every few games, when he thinks he's not getting his calls, he can be a bit missish. Of course, that's just my opinion, so take it for the $0.02 that's it is worth.

[Spurminator]

I'll say it for you...

"Tony Parker is a selfish, me-first point guard. He shouldn't be scoring so much, he should be racking up 10-12 assists per game like all real point guards."

[boutons]

"I have never seen Tim do that"

In the loss @WIZ, he did it so much when played tough by the Wiz big men, he fucked up his head and his game, which was major factor in the Spurs losing that game.

Sometimes the ONLY emotion seen from Tim is when he's pissed off about no calls or bad calls.

[xcoriate]

I'd like to thank travis2, 101A and easjer for taking up the charge while I slept

[Obstructed_View]

He had a true PG, not a shooting PG. I'm talking about a Ridnour, Kidd, Nash, Stockton, even Brevin Knight. Despite the fact that I like Parker better than any of these players, Duncan might be better off.

In no way do I want a trade or any shit like that--- this is more of just a "what if" thing.

Thoughts?
Duncan has a true PG with a good outside shot sitting on the end of the bench getting zero minutes.

[easjer]

I'd like to thank travis2, 101A and easjer for taking up the charge while I slept

:tu

My pleasure.

[ALVAREZ6]

I think TP has an All-Star game mentality this year, he is really aggressive and is taking more shots than last year. He's doin a great job though.

[LittleGeneral]

Horrible thread.

Ridnour is a shoot-first PG if I've ever seen one. Biggest ballhog since Steve Francis.

[ALVAREZ6]

Horrible thread.

Ridnour is a shoot-first PG if I've ever seen one. Biggest ballhog since Steve Francis.
Steve Francis is a perfect example of a terrible PG, terrible player overall. Way over-rated.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

He had a true PG, not a shooting PG. I'm talking about a Ridnour, Kidd, Nash, Stockton, even Brevin Knight. Despite the fact that I like Parker better than any of these players, Duncan might be better off.

In no way do I want a trade or any shit like that--- this is more of just a "what if" thing.

Thoughts?


you just turned my dreams to flames

[Brutalis]

Aside from ignoring the thread starters Name and Sig....


Yes. It is a fact that if Tony was a true PG it would only be better for the Spurs. If he could put up 9 asts a game. Then it would really be over the rest of the NBA.

[Lady M]

Brad Miller is the best in assists in Sacramento
trade TP for him he 's a very good PG
:oops

[Dazzle]

Steve Francis is a perfect example of a terrible PG, terrible player overall. Way over-rated.
Are you crazy? Francis is an amazing player, but is a ballhog. He is the best rebounding PG in the league and has all the talent in the world. However, he will NEVER win a ring.

[bobbyjoe]

How many guards have averaged 9 assists on teams where the ball goes through low-post stars 60-70% of the time? Parker's playing phenomenal right now. He's not a Jason Kidd or Stockton as a pure PG but far from a ballhog like Steve Francis or Stephon. His outside J is the only real weakness in his game, not his passing.

[travis2]

I'd like to thank travis2, 101A and easjer for taking up the charge while I slept

happy to oblige...:)

[pache100]

Ridnour is a shoot-first PG if I've ever seen one. Biggest ballhog since Steve Francis.

:tu :cooldevil


Steve Francis is a perfect example of a terrible PG, terrible player overall. Way over-rated.

:tu

He's a mean, nasty little man, too.

[smeagol]

Bring Speedy back :lol

[ambchang]

Perfect example of Tony's terrible vision

More often than not, Bowen has made defenders pay for leaving him to cut off Tony Parker or double-team Tim Duncan. Because Parker has penetrated into the lane so successfully this season, Chicago coach Scott Skiles thinks teams have to get the ball out of his hands sooner to allow defenders time to close out on Bowen and the Spurs' other shooters.

"It's like sometimes they forget (Parker) has an outlet and can kick it to me, Bowen said. "There have been times where my defender has actually turned his back and looked at Tony, and he just whips (the ball) past (the defender's) head to me."

[mathbzh]

This kind of thread is always funny.
Of course it would be better to have a lineup like:

PG Nash
SG Kobe
SF Lebron
PF Duncan
C Amare

And KG, Iverson, Kidd, Dirk... on the bench

SA has the best lineup in the league. For me it is enough.

Right now Parker plays really well. He has strength and weakness as anyone.
While he fits Pop plans it is OK.

Does it really matter who scores in a team?
Two rings in 3 years isn't enough?

How many 23 years oldl PG have more than 20 pts and 6 assists a game?

[mathbzh]

To complete my post, when he was 23 (97-98) Nash stats were 9,1 ppg 3.4 apg and 2 rpg in 21 minutes.
in
98-99 : 7.9 ppg 5.5 apg 2.9 rpg in 31 minutes
99-00 : 8.6ppg 4.9 apg 2.2 rpg in 27 minutes

It seems than basket IQ don't come so easily when you are a PG.

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

I think that Tony's ability to get to the hoop keeps teams more off balance than if we had a more traditional PG. I'll admit that in his early years with the Spurs I would have much rather had someone more in the mold of Kidd or Stockton, but the growth that he's shown in the last few years I wouldn't trade him for any other PG in the league. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that he's necessarily the best in the league at the moment, but he's the exact guy that the Spurs need, he's young and he's only going to get better.

[TDMVPDPOY]

But would u trade him up now for c.paul from N.O? i do it in a heartbeat