Spot Number 6 - Top 50 Spurs

SpursTalk's Top 50 Spurs
1. Tim Duncan
2. David Robinson
3. George Gervin
4. Gregg Popovich
5. Angelo Drossos

------------------------------

To pass the time until the start of preseason, let's see how SpursTalk.com ranks the Top 50 Spurs. Those eligible for the list include all players, coaches and owners. I don't want to define "top" too narrowly, but I think the best way to do it would be to think of the list as a list of the 50 most influential people who have helped make the Spurs one of the most successful franchises in the history of sport.

For more information on what we are doing, check out this thread.

In this thread, we will vote for spot number six. Please place your vote. If you will, also explain in this thread why you voted how you did.

Thanks.



P.S.

Poll options listed in alphabetical order. If you want to vote for someone not on the list, post in the thread and I'll add the person.

Voting will end 2AM CST Friday morning, however if the voting is close, it may be extended an extra day. Please vote only once.

I'm not sure how Ill vote this time. I think I can make a case for Sean Elliott or Manu, Silas or maybe even Tony Parker. I think if this were a few years down the line, Parker would win it easily, but right now it probably goes to Manu, Elliott or Silas. I refuse to put AJ above those players, but he probably has a chance too.

Between Manu and James Silas, I had to go Manu. Silas is next.

It should be Parker but it will be Ginobili. Go Figure. :rolleyes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

It should be Parker but it will be Ginobili. Go Figure. :rolleyes

---

Talk about a cop out. If it turns out to be Manu, its because most people think it should be Manu. There's a good case to be made for both. The bullshit implication that if Manu wins it its because of homers is kind of tiresome really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNuMaNiAc

Talk about a cop out. If it turns out to be Manu, its because most people think it should be Manu. There's a good case to be made for both. The bullshit implication that if Manu wins it its because of homers is kind of tiresome really.

---

:rollin @ Spurstalk not being full of Manu's homers.
Way to ignore the reality.

I'm waiting for the good case about Manu being ahead of Tony...

The five that I think lead the pack are Silas, Kenon, Elliott, Ginobili and Parker.

I think Silas had the best single year out of those five players. He got named to the All-ABA first team and was just amazing that year. He was very good for another year but then injury struck and he never returned to his previous level. He certainly should be coming up soon.

Kenon might be the most underrated player in Spurs history. Check that, he is the most underrated player in Spurs history. He played for the Spurs for five years and averaged more than 20 points and more than 10 rebounds during those five years. He was also an All-Star three of those years. On stats and All-Star appearances alone, he has a case to be right here.

Elliott not only was a very good player, he also gets bonus points for hitting the biggest shot in Spurs history and for coming back from kidney transplant surgery. Two All-Star games as a player and has been a great representative of the Spurs for the last almost 20 years. I'm not sure it counts for anything but even today, he's probably the biggest Spurs fan there is.

Everyone knows Manu Ginobili's greatness. Three championships rings, an All-Star appearance, an All-NBA third team selection and a 6MOY. His 2005 playoff run was a statistical and real life masterpiece. He has also played very well in the last five regular seasons. He hasn't repeated his 2005 playoff run in the last three postseason runs but he's more often than not been very, very good. His per minute stats and the level of excitement, creativity and heart he brings to the Spurs can't be overstated.

Even though he's young and even though I may very well be wrong, I'm actually leaning toward voting Parker here. I think Parker beats out Silas due to more years playing at a high level. I think Parker beats Elliott just because Parker is the better player. I think Parker beats Kenon because Kenon didn't have the longevity or the impact on winning that Parker has had. Parker versus Ginobili is extremely close but I give the slight edge to Parker. Not only has Parker been on the Spurs a year longer, he has two years on Ginobili in terms of being a top three player on the team.

Here is my breakdown from an earlier thread. Like I said, Ginobili is probably the better player right now but once you add in everything, Parker just has the slight edge in terms of the Spurs careers to date.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

To me, Ginobili versus Parker is really damn close. Even though Parker has no shot at beating Ginobili in a popularity contest amongst Spurs fans, if you just look at the numbers, accomplishments and his role each year, Parker has a really good case.

First, straight up numbers, Parker has more points and more assists in both per game averages and career totals for both the regular season and the playoffs. He also has a higher field goal percentage. Ginobili leads Parker in other categories such as rebounds, steals and three-point percentage, but those margins don't look wide enough to clearly put Ginobili ahead of Parker just based on stats.

Parker's accomplishments include two All-Star Game appearances and a Finals MVP. Ginobili has one All-Star Game appearance, a third team All-NBA selection and a Sixth Man of the Year award. While the Finals MVP has to be considered the most prestigious of all those accomplishments, I think it could be successfully argued their accomplishments are close to a wash.

Even if you consider the previous two categories tied, when you look at their respective roles on championship teams, that's when Ginobili's case becomes harder to make. In 2007, I'd assume most would agree that Parker had the better playoff run. In 2005, it was Ginobili who had the better playoff run. If 2003, Parker was the third best player during that run, while Ginobili was either the fifth or sixth best player on that championship team.

If you put a gun to my head and told me to pick which one is better today if they are both 100% healthy, I'd say Ginobili. On top of that, Ginobili is no doubt much more fun to watch, his likability factor is off the charts and his international exploits are astounding. All that said, take away the emotional aspect and it is hard to say that Ginobili deserves to make the list before Parker.

Although I'd love to see that argument. :stirpot:

---

The best argument I've seen for Ginobili over Parker is that Ginobili is the player the Spurs go to when they need a bucket in crunch time. However, while that is true and Ginobili definitely was the crunch time beast in the 2005 playoff run, since then it has been a different story. In the last three playoffs, Ginobili has shot sub-30% in crunch time while Parker has shot over 50%.

The difference between Ginobili and Parker is so thin that I may very well be swayed if someone can explain their reasoning. I also think Kenon, Elliott or Silas wouldn't be bad votes here. Really, any of those five have legitimate arguments.

I'm gonna go with RC....

he got us Tony and Manu

I'm going to vote for Stephen Jackson under all my user names :smokin












just kidding ... maybe

Just like I had to vote for Gore in 2000 when I really wanted Bradley, I'll vote Manu because he's the best choice that has a shot in hell of winning right now (although the gap for Silas>Manu is a lot smaller than the one for Bradley>Gore :lol). Manu would be my next pick after Si anyways.

BTW, where is Dennis Lindsey on the list of choices? :stirpot:

In my personal list, it's currently boiling down to Ginobili, Parker, Elliott, Bowen, or Buford. All of the reasons should either be obvious, or previously mentioned.

However, I eventually had to go with Tony Parker. timvp pretty much nailed it in his summary. The accomplishments are virtually a wash, but I'd still personally take Tony's Finals MVP and extra All-Star Appearance over Manu's 6MOY Award.

Aside from the brilliant Finals run in 2007, Tony was more instrumental to the playoff runs in both 2003 and 2007, and is arguably more instrumental the Spurs system as a whole as he is obviously running the show, night in and night out.

If Manu were to go down right now, the Spurs offense stutters. If Tony goes down, the Spurs offense as it should be does not exist. Can you imagine trying to survive a playoff series with Jacque Vaughn as your Starting One? Fuggetaboutit.

Furthermore, Tony has been asked to handle a great deal of responsibility with this team from nearly day one. It took all of what, five games into his rookie season before Pop handed over the starting reigns and started drilling away. Tony has taken all of Pop's yelling and criticism and coaching and turned into one of the elite point guards in this league, for this team. And when all is said and done, Parker may end becoming just to as important to San Antonio as Tim and David, especially if he is able to carry on the winning tradition into the twilight years of Duncan and beyond. If Parker finishes his career in San Antonio, he has definitely already earned a spot in the rafters.

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2007/writers/m...s/p1.spurs.jpg
Not to mention the bond these two share. Without Tony, there'd be no Teemy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNuMaNiAc

Talk about a cop out. If it turns out to be Manu, its because most people think it should be Manu. There's a good case to be made for both. The bullshit implication that if Manu wins it its because of homers is kind of tiresome really.

---

Its the damn truth though. I love Manu but to ignore the reality that he has the biggest rabid section of followers on this team is just ridiculous.

It really should be Parker. Manu has been a great player for the Spurs, but I think if you just weight their Spurs careers Parker has a slight edge here. Manu will have the edge overall due to his national team success but thats not what we're talking about here.

I think the icing on the cake is the last playoff run. Parker was clearly the better player.

This one is vey very difficult.

For me it’s a tie TP and Manu but since we have to choose one.

Manu was fantastic in 05, TP was great in 07.

When Manu arrived he was already the best player in the Argentina NT, Euroleague and Italian MVP. TP arrived as a unknown. He played in France but wasn’t a star and also wasn’t in France NT.

He arrived and needed to learn a lot more than Manu. First he needed to prove Pop he could run the team, than after the Spurs tried to get Kidd he needed to prove he was the right guy for the PG spot and after his so-so 05 Finals he decided to add a reliable J to reach another level.

Manu is the player that I most like to see playing but I’ll vote for Tony.

I can't believe I'm one of only two people who voted for Sean...

If AJ doesn't win this poll, I'll relapse on coke and punch out some women.

Neck&neck poll.... i voted for Manu because i like him more. Their achivements (in Spurs uniform) are basically identical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

:rollin @ Spurstalk not being full of Manu's homers.
Way to ignore the reality.

I'm waiting for the good case about Manu being ahead of Tony...

---

Manu is the better player.

Maybe three years down the road Parker will win it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

Way to ignore the reality.

I'm waiting for the good case about Manu being ahead of Tony...

---

Aside from him being from the same country as you, what is your case for Tony . . . ?

Parker has been with the team longer and has the better stats and will finish with the better career stats.

Voted for Manu, although the arguments for Tony were very good. I'll argue for Manu without going into Tony. Just because I say Manu is ___ doesn't imply that Tony isn't.

Manu, for me, embodies all that is classy and good about the Spurs. He has been very instrumental in the past playoff runs, even when the Spurs didn't go on to win the championship. A lot of people remember the magical Finals performance from Tony, but few remember how Manu stepped up in the previous rounds to help the Spurs move on to the next rounds.

It was also clear this past season that the magic lies in Manu. When he was healthy, he was damn near unstoppable. He was playing out of his mind. Without a healthy Manu in the playoffs, the Spurs was just a contender, not a winner.

He also shown that humility and sacrifice of a true Spur. Steve Nash said before that you could see that the guy's intention is really pure. All he wants is to win. I don't know a lot of All-Stars who will let themselves be played like a yo-yo from the starting spot to the bench without grumbling. I don't know that many All-Stars who would come off the bench without grumbling. Manu has done it all of his career, and he has never shown ill will.

He also didn't arrive into such a stellar situation other than the Spurs being a championship squad. He was a great star in Europe, and yet he had to start from virtually nil when he arrived. Just like Tony, he had to learn the NBA system, and worked hard to earn the trust of Pop and his teammates. He had to earn his spot.

As for the argument based on Tony having more All-Stars than Manu, it's pretty weak. Everyone knows Manu deserved a spot this year, especially at that point when he was playing so unbelievably out of this world.

And 2005 Pistons > 2007 Cavs. Manu almost shared the Finals MVP trophy with Timmy. No Ginobili, no 2005 championship. If Tony had played at a lower level than his amazing performance in the 2007 Finals, the Spurs still would have taken the championship, IMO.

You honestly can't go wrong between Manu/Parker/Elliott/Silas and even AJ wouldn't be horrible here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smeagol

Manu is the better player.

Maybe three years down the road Parker will win it.

---

RIF.

It's not about who is the better player but who has "helped make the Spurs one of the most successful franchises in the history of sport" the most.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

RIF.

It's not about who is the better player but who has "helped make the Spurs one of the most successful franchises in the history of sport" the most.

---

So you think you can make a better case for Tony than for Manu?

At the end of the day, it is a matter of opinion. Both are great players and both have helped the franchise. I still think Manu contributed more than Tony simply because Manu appeared at key moments of the championship runs.

But I'm sure you have good reasons to vote for Tony.

At this point, I have refrained myself from voting, given that I'm a newbie as a Spurs fan. I cannot compare Manu or Tony to Silas given that I have never seen Silas play and don't know much about his contribution to the Spurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smeagol

So you think you can make a better case for Tony than for Manu?

---

Between 2004 and 2008, Parker and Ginobili were damn close.
However, in 2003, Parker was a way bigger piece to the championship.
So when you consider their whole contribution as a Spurs, Parker is ahead of Manu.
To me, it's as simple as that.

I don't think you can ignore the accomplishments of the Argentina team with Manu as its driving force. With that in mind, I voted for Manu.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurster

I don't think you can ignore the accomplishments of the Argentina team with Manu as its driving force. With that in mind, I voted for Manu.

---

yes we can ignore ignore what Manu has done with his national team, and we must.
it's a top 50 spurs (see 1st post)

Tony Parker.

The amount of shit he has done through his career as a Spur is staggering. The challenges and expectations placed upon him. The failures which he then learned from. The treatment from Pop. The change in Spurs style that started when he brought youth and energy and pace to the team.

The Spurs make him starting PG after 4 games. Not only that, at that stage, he is the first European PG to be a full time starter in the NBA (at least from memory, if not, I doubt there have been more than 4/5) and not only that, but he was only 19. The team has a great season and makes the playoffs and Parker has to face the best PG in the NBA in Gary Payton. What does he do? Plays incredible and puts it to Payton in a way nobody could of expected and helps the Spurs through to the second round to face LA. Now we all know about the embarassing events of the year before against LA, but this time with Parker in the lineup the Spurs challenge the Lakers and scare them far more than the previous playoffs and actually lead going into the 3rd quarter of each game, only to lose 4-1. Incredible season from a rookie PG, let alone a 19yr old european PG.

2003 comes and everyone is going on about Jason Kidd coming to the Spurs to be the new PG etc... What does Tony do? Sulk about it? No. He plays incredible basketball all season, gets over his demons against Marbury in the first round, torches LA in the second, outplays Steve Nash in the WCF and then plays Jason fucking Kidd to a standstill through the first 3 games of the NBA Finals. Sure he had 2 shockers in the final 3 games, but come on, the guy was 21, played a long season and was going against the best PG in the NBA. His 2003 season was incredible.

2004 and Tony sort of started treading water. While his season was great, the fans were wondering if he was going to take the next step. Then the playoffs come and Tony goes ballistic on Memphis and on the 4 Hall Of Fame and Hall of Fame coach lakers. After the first 2 games, the Lakers defensive attack gears itself towards Parker. Think about that. A 3rd year 22yr old PG is the main focus of a team spearheaded by someone who is considered by many as the best coach ever... Needless to say, Tony struggled. But he didn't let it ruin him, and as we all see now, it only made him a stronger and better play.

Actually, fuck it. I can't be bothered doing a run down anymore. The guy is a finals MVP. The guy is an All Star. He is targeted by opposition coaches every game as practically the #1 threat to fuck up there defensive strategies and he still delivers. He develops a goto move in the paint as a 6ft lightweight PG? Fuck, as much as I absolutely love Drob as my favourite sportsman ever, he never had a goto move in the paint. Our 6ft PG does? You gotta be kidding. He holds Richard Hamilton without a FG for 47 minutes of a Game 7 in the NBA Finals. He pulls out a huge defensive stop against Richard Hamilton in the OT of an NBA Finals Game 5. He plays 2xMVP Steve Nash to a standstill, even outplays him on the regular in the playoffs.

He gets bagged for not having a jumpshot, but develops one within a year that is as good as most PG's in the league. Doesn't have a huge ego, doesn't mind giving the ball up to another person at the end of the game if it's for the good of a team. Is durable. Plays defense better than 75% of the PG's in the NBA. Is clutch as fuck in the playoffs now after having the jitters early on. Get's the Spurs through a lot of the regular season. Might be the Spurs best regular season player actually. This guy has gone from being a 19year old Euro PG from Paris fucking Basket Racing and is now a scary mofo for any NBA team facing him.

As an influential person in Spurs history, I can't go past someone who has started at PG for 3 championships and been a Finals MVP for 1 of them. Starting PG for 7 years, two time All Star, and has been in the teams best 3 players for all of those 7 years.

Fuck Spurs fans who hate on Parker. He is incredible and we are very lucky to have him.

Tony. Then Manu. Then Silas. Then Elliott.

You'd think Sequ would be all over this poll already. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurster

I don't think you can ignore the accomplishments of the Argentina team with Manu as its driving force. With that in mind, I voted for Manu.

---

This poll is not about what they did for Argentinas team.

Gotta go Manu than Parker, and Elliott

I can't believe that it NOW matters who a better player is. We're not talking about better players, because I think any of the remaining players is a better player than Pop or Drossos.

Manu is a better Spur, has meant more to this franchise (to-date) than anyone else on the list, and his impact to a city with a strong Latino base is more than anything Tony and his frenchie raps could ever do.

It's Manu, 2 spots too late.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurster

I don't think you can ignore the accomplishments of the Argentina team with Manu as its driving force. With that in mind, I voted for Manu.

---

Which is the whole point. It isn't about that - its about greatest Spur. If you take ONLY their Spurs games into account it should clearly be TP.

The pool does say greatest player or greatest accomplishments or greatest past not at the Spurs.

You think Michael Jordan is remembered as the greatest Wizards player ever?

Silas!

I voted Manu because of the names listed, he sticks out as the one with the largest quantity of memorable moments.
Also he is one of my favorite Spurs of all time.

wasn't Silas runner up in MVP voting to dr J?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J.T.

If AJ doesn't win this poll, I'll relapse on coke and punch out some women.

---

Well now we know J.T.'s secret identity. I just never realized that A.J. and Vernon Maxwell were still that close.

Not that I'd vote for him yet... but I imagine Sam Presti should be on such a list eventually.

Manu's international achievements ...

... shows that he is a great player without TD on the court.

... brings a lot of international visibility to the Spurs.

Sean Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Lu ck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_

:rollin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

To pass the time until the start of preseason, let's see how SpursTalk.com ranks the Top 50 Spurs. Those eligible for the list include all players, coaches and owners. I don't want to define "top" too narrowly, but I think the best way to do it would be to think of the list as a list of the 50 most influential people who have helped make the Spurs one of the most successful franchises in the history of sport.

For more information on what we are doing, check out this thread.

In this thread, we will vote for spot number six. Please place your vote. If you will, also explain in this thread why you voted how you did.

---

It clearly says most influential. So all things considered with the player must be taken into account. With Manu's fame in Argentina and in all Spanish speaking countries, his Olympic success and... that should be accounted for because it has shaped the Spurs and their fan base.

I went ahead and voted Manu. Tony's international influence is strong as well, he has a Finals MVP, and he played more than a bit role in the 2003 championship. But, hey, he's no Manu Ginobili.

Manu. Parker is french and cannot be trusted. Crumbles under pressure too often.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPG21920

It clearly says most influential. So all things considered with the player must be taken into account. With Manu's fame in Argentina and in all Spanish speaking countries, his Olympic success and... that should be accounted for because it has shaped the Spurs and their fan base.

---

With that line of thinking Tony should get votes for marrying Eva.

I wonder if the plan was to start this thread just to get to the Tony vs Manu debate in one organized place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

With that line of thinking Tony should get votes for marrying Eva.

---

Brilliant. One has to do with basketball (playing for country, playing on the world stage and bridging the gap between language barriers) and one has to do with...

I wish people were better at using deductive reasoning.

I went with Parker, just because I don't think the 2nd and 4th championships happen without him. People can point to Parker's disappearance late in the '03 Finals and at a few other points along the way, but Tony Parker was absolutely vital to the Spurs reaching those Finals -- his Games 3 and 4 in Dallas that year completely changed the WCF that year.

I also think that Parker is a pivotal figure in Spurs history because, to me, he represents the swagger that the Spurs needed badly after the embarassment that was the 2001 West Finals. It wasn't just Parker who helped the Spurs erase that memory, but Parker came in and immediately began attacking and rarely backed down. Concerted efforts could deter him (the Nets' defensive shifts in the '03 Finals and the Lakers' paint packing come to mind) -- and sometimes still do. But there's no doubting that Tony Parker brought with him the one thing that the Spurs immediately needed in the aftermath of the worst humiliation in franchise history -- confidence.

I think, on the whole, that Parker is probably a tad more consistent than Ginobili has been; I think, on the whole, that Parker is more durable than Ginobili has been; and I think, on the whole, that Parker is much harder to replace than Ginobili has been. Parker is probably not as spectacular as Ginobili can be, and Parker is undoubtedly not as beloved as Ginobili is.

Also, it's not a deciding factor for me, but I got to thinking that there would never be a time that Popovich thought his team might be better by bringing Parker off the bench. I think Manu's style of play demands reduced minutes and I think it's far easier to find a useful wing player than a point, but there's some hint of Parker's value to his team in the fact that nobody would ever think to use him as a reserve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

Between 2004 and 2008, Parker and Ginobili were damn close.
However, in 2003, Parker was a way bigger piece to the championship.
So when you consider their whole contribution as a Spurs, Parker is ahead of Manu.
To me, it's as simple as that.

---

Speedy Claxton?
Manu was big in the LA series and in the Finals. He also had some moments against Dallas. But what will always stick with me is when people were calling for Speedy Claxton off the bench to sub in for Tony.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by century

Manu. Parker is french and cannot be trusted. Crumbles under pressure too often.

---

Douche.

I could say the same about Manu. Doesn't make it true. Because it isn't. Just like what you said isn't true.

Neither of our backcourt crubmle under pressure, they are both great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

But there's no doubting that Tony Parker brought with him the one thing that the Spurs immediately needed in the aftermath of the worst humiliation in franchise history -- confidence.

---

That's what I was trying to hint at in my post. That is one of the biggest things Tony brought to the Spurs.

:tu to FWD for eloquently stating something I was unable to. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MI21

Douche.

I could say the same about Manu. Doesn't make it true. Because it isn't. Just like what you said isn't true.

Neither of our backcourt crubmle under pressure, they are both great.

---

You're just a clueless cocksucker. When Manu disappears it is because of an injury. OTOH, Parker disappears regularly with no apparent reason aside from tough opposition. Manu is a fighter, Parker submits too often.

Parker is good when he is motivated but he has too many lapses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by E20

Speedy Claxton?
Manu was big in the LA series and in the Finals. He also had some moments against Dallas. But what will always stick with me is when people were calling for Speedy Claxton off the bench to sub in for Tony.

---

Speedy Claxton is remembered as far better than what he was, that's for sure.

Let's just forget Tony's input in Games 1, 2, 3 and 5? He gets a pass for Game 4 like everyone else, because from memory, everyone was shit. Game 6 he was absolutely terrible. He was 21, 2nd year player going up against Jason Kidd, the guy everyone wanted the Spurs to sign to replace him. He did very, very well.

how am i the only vote for brent?!?!:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by century

You're just a clueless cocksucker. When Manu disappears it is because of an injury. OTOH, Parker disappears regularly with no apparent reason aside from tough opposition. Manu is a fighter, Parker submits too often.

Parker is good when he is motivated but he has too many lapses.

---

Oh, I see. It's only injuries.

:rolleyes

Fuck this, new age Spurs fan can't appreciate what they have.

I voted Elliott. It's a bit of a personal pick, as he's my all time favorite Spur. Talent wise, yes I think he's a step back of Tony and Manu, although for the shamefully brief prime when he knees were still fully intact he was an All Star caliber SF.

What puts him at the top of my list is that this is a Spurs list, and at this point I put him second only to DRob in terms of being not just a career Spur but a lifelong Spur. Technically you couldn't call him a career Spur, but I hated the trade, I hated Rodman, and Sean hated his time in Detroit, so I'm on board for giving reality a friendly rewrite that makes everyone happier. At this point their basketball resumes are more accomplished, but with big changes looming in the next five years or so for the Spurs it's not outside the realm of possibility that Manu or Tony could end up elsewhere, and I woudn't be surprised if their retirement years take place away from San Antonio as well.

Alot of people liked to point to AJ or David as the symbol of what that 99 championship team was all about, but I really think that Sean really embodied the journey that team took to become champions. AJ was always a tough, hard worker, and most any Spurs fan knew that David was not soft. But the knocks that people put on those mid-90's teams could be accurately applied to Elliott; namely that the talent was definitely there, but whether you call it drive or heart or mental toughness or any other sports cliche, there was something lacking. He had a tendency to fade when the Spurs needed him the most in the postseaon. He was not the guy you expected to bury the Blazers with the most dramatic shot in Spurs history, and definitely not the guy you expected to chase the other team's best scorer on a pair of worn out knees and busted kidneys. He became that guy under Pop and that change was the epitome of what that 99 was all about in my book.

Plus, this guy makes League Pass worth every penny in my book. Being able to get Spurs home coverage for about 30 games a year here in Houston is such a joy. Doesn't matter what the score is Sean usually finds a way to make the game entertaining.

Between being a part of that much iconic Spurs history and his continued presence there, he's got my vote.

:tu Elliott gets my vote as well.

A friendly reminder to those who haven't voted yet...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MI21

Tony Parker.

The amount of shit he has done through his career as a Spur is staggering. The challenges and expectations placed upon him. The failures which he then learned from. The treatment from Pop. The change in Spurs style that started when he brought youth and energy and pace to the team.

The Spurs make him starting PG after 4 games. Not only that, at that stage, he is the first European PG to be a full time starter in the NBA (at least from memory, if not, I doubt there have been more than 4/5) and not only that, but he was only 19. The team has a great season and makes the playoffs and Parker has to face the best PG in the NBA in Gary Payton. What does he do? Plays incredible and puts it to Payton in a way nobody could of expected and helps the Spurs through to the second round to face LA. Now we all know about the embarassing events of the year before against LA, but this time with Parker in the lineup the Spurs challenge the Lakers and scare them far more than the previous playoffs and actually lead going into the 3rd quarter of each game, only to lose 4-1. Incredible season from a rookie PG, let alone a 19yr old european PG.

2003 comes and everyone is going on about Jason Kidd coming to the Spurs to be the new PG etc... What does Tony do? Sulk about it? No. He plays incredible basketball all season, gets over his demons against Marbury in the first round, torches LA in the second, outplays Steve Nash in the WCF and then plays Jason fucking Kidd to a standstill through the first 3 games of the NBA Finals. Sure he had 2 shockers in the final 3 games, but come on, the guy was 21, played a long season and was going against the best PG in the NBA. His 2003 season was incredible.

2004 and Tony sort of started treading water. While his season was great, the fans were wondering if he was going to take the next step. Then the playoffs come and Tony goes ballistic on Memphis and on the 4 Hall Of Fame and Hall of Fame coach lakers. After the first 2 games, the Lakers defensive attack gears itself towards Parker. Think about that. A 3rd year 22yr old PG is the main focus of a team spearheaded by someone who is considered by many as the best coach ever... Needless to say, Tony struggled. But he didn't let it ruin him, and as we all see now, it only made him a stronger and better play.

Actually, fuck it. I can't be bothered doing a run down anymore. The guy is a finals MVP. The guy is an All Star. He is targeted by opposition coaches every game as practically the #1 threat to fuck up there defensive strategies and he still delivers. He develops a goto move in the paint as a 6ft lightweight PG? Fuck, as much as I absolutely love Drob as my favourite sportsman ever, he never had a goto move in the paint. Our 6ft PG does? You gotta be kidding. He holds Richard Hamilton without a FG for 47 minutes of a Game 7 in the NBA Finals. He pulls out a huge defensive stop against Richard Hamilton in the OT of an NBA Finals Game 5. He plays 2xMVP Steve Nash to a standstill, even outplays him on the regular in the playoffs.

He gets bagged for not having a jumpshot, but develops one within a year that is as good as most PG's in the league. Doesn't have a huge ego, doesn't mind giving the ball up to another person at the end of the game if it's for the good of a team. Is durable. Plays defense better than 75% of the PG's in the NBA. Is clutch as fuck in the playoffs now after having the jitters early on. Get's the Spurs through a lot of the regular season. Might be the Spurs best regular season player actually. This guy has gone from being a 19year old Euro PG from Paris fucking Basket Racing and is now a scary mofo for any NBA team facing him.

As an influential person in Spurs history, I can't go past someone who has started at PG for 3 championships and been a Finals MVP for 1 of them. Starting PG for 7 years, two time All Star, and has been in the teams best 3 players for all of those 7 years.

Fuck Spurs fans who hate on Parker. He is incredible and we are very lucky to have him.

---

It's nice that Parker has a Finals MVP and all but it did come against a weaker than weak Cavs team. Daniel Gibson wasn't exactly a seasoned vet or anything and it was a foregone conclusion that the Spurs were going to stomp a mudhole in that team which they did. I was hoping to see Parker get another shot at the Pistons and prove his mettle because Billups ate up Parker so bad in the 2005 Finals that Popovich had to practically hide him on offense (especially in Game 7) as well as giving his PG duties to Ginobili and Barry. I think you pretty much had to highlight and overrate Parker's defensive play a tad bit to make up for his absolute choking. I'm not sure where you came up with Parker holding Hamilton without a FG for 47 minutes. I don't think Hamilton even played that long in Game 7 and I'm quite certain he scored in that game lol. And he had a myriad of defenders on him. Not just Parker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurs_fan_in_exile

I voted Elliott. It's a bit of a personal pick, as he's my all time favorite Spur. Talent wise, yes I think he's a step back of Tony and Manu, although for the shamefully brief prime when he knees were still fully intact he was an All Star caliber SF.

What puts him at the top of my list is that this is a Spurs list, and at this point I put him second only to DRob in terms of being not just a career Spur but a lifelong Spur. Technically you couldn't call him a career Spur, but I hated the trade, I hated Rodman, and Sean hated his time in Detroit, so I'm on board for giving reality a friendly rewrite that makes everyone happier. At this point their basketball resumes are more accomplished, but with big changes looming in the next five years or so for the Spurs it's not outside the realm of possibility that Manu or Tony could end up elsewhere, and I woudn't be surprised if their retirement years take place away from San Antonio as well.

Alot of people liked to point to AJ or David as the symbol of what that 99 championship team was all about, but I really think that Sean really embodied the journey that team took to become champions. AJ was always a tough, hard worker, and most any Spurs fan knew that David was not soft. But the knocks that people put on those mid-90's teams could be accurately applied to Elliott; namely that the talent was definitely there, but whether you call it drive or heart or mental toughness or any other sports cliche, there was something lacking. He had a tendency to fade when the Spurs needed him the most in the postseaon. He was not the guy you expected to bury the Blazers with the most dramatic shot in Spurs history, and definitely not the guy you expected to chase the other team's best scorer on a pair of worn out knees and busted kidneys. He became that guy under Pop and that change was the epitome of what that 99 was all about in my book.

Plus, this guy makes League Pass worth every penny in my book. Being able to get Spurs home coverage for about 30 games a year here in Houston is such a joy. Doesn't matter what the score is Sean usually finds a way to make the game entertaining.

Between being a part of that much iconic Spurs history and his continued presence there, he's got my vote.

---

Considering their involvement in 3 of the 4 Spurs Championships, I have to put Manu and Tony both ahead of Sean.

However, Sean will always be one of my absolute favorite Spurs, and as soon as 9 and 21 make the list, I'll be voting to put him on next.

Not to mention all the great laughs and memorable moments.

"Ta-Co Ca-Ba-Na!"

Ooh, and this cracked me up...

lol at ducks having more than 10 trolls to keep the chase close :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dex

Considering their involvement in 3 of the 4 Spurs Championships, I have to put Manu and Tony both ahead of Sean.

However, Sean will always be one of my absolute favorite Spurs, and as soon as 9 and 21 make the list, I'll be voting to put him on next.

Not to mention all the great laughs and memorable moments.

"Ta-Co Ca-Ba-Na!"

Ooh, and this cracked me up...

---

Oh shit, I totally got sidetracked and forgot to mention the Cabana commercials. That's the icing on the cake!

Quote:

---

It clearly says most influential. So all things considered with the player must be taken into account. With Manu's fame in Argentina and in all Spanish speaking countries, his Olympic success and... that should be accounted for because it has shaped the Spurs and their fan base.

---

I don't think his international career should be accounted in this but it is very impressive in the international way. I would put Tony next in the list. He's been the point guard and has really grown each and every year. He has carried this team. I think Manu should be up here somewhere with him but I think the only thing Manu's going to be recognized for with the Spurs is being the sixth man of the year:p:.

I think it's between Parker and Ginobili for me. My first instinct is to go with Manu, but I also gave the nod to Duncan over Robinson earlier in this poll, and one of my reasons was giving Duncan advance credit for what he was going to do over the next 5-10 years.

While I don't claim to be psychic or know any more about what will happen by 2018 than anyone else, I'm pretty sure Parker's impact over the next 10 years will be much more than Manu's. I'm not one of those who buy into the idea that Manu will be completely ineffective in 2 years, but I think based on who is on the roster at this point, this will essentially be Tony's team when Tim nears retirement. While you don't want to throw too much speculation into the voting, you also don't want an order that you'll be completely unhappy about in 10 years.

Who's better? Tony Parker or Manu Ginobili? :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Its the damn truth though. I love Manu but to ignore the reality that he has the biggest rabid section of followers on this team is just ridiculous.

It really should be Parker. Manu has been a great player for the Spurs, but I think if you just weight their Spurs careers Parker has a slight edge here. Manu will have the edge overall due to his national team success but thats not what we're talking about here.

I think the icing on the cake is the last playoff run. Parker was clearly the better player.

---

07 yes, but not so much before that. Last year Manu was hurt so I won't guage that playoff run, he still had some great games. Every year before that though pretty much in the playoffs it was Manu, Parker would dissapear in many series and even be benched in favor of a backup in big games due to innefectiveness, fact. Manu is just so clutch it's hard for me to go against him in this one, he is just so unique and I have never seen a player like that before him. He doest the things that win games, period.

Parker is #7 on this list though, no doubt.

Whos that ref Pops yelling at? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by E20

Speedy Claxton?
Manu was big in the LA series and in the Finals. He also had some moments against Dallas. But what will always stick with me is when people were calling for Speedy Claxton off the bench to sub in for Tony.

---

2003 NBA Finals Statistics
http://www.nba.com/spurs/stats/2002/...als_stats.html

Tim Duncan 43.8 min 24.2 pts 17.0 rbs 5.3 ast
Tony Parker 35.3 min 14.0 pts 3.2 rbs 4.2 ast
David Robinson 26.8 min 10.8 pts 7.3 rbs 0.7 ast
Stephen Jackson 35.5 min 10.3 pts 4.2 rbs 2.7 ast
Manu Ginobili 28.7 min 8.7 pts 4.5 rbs 2.0 ast
...
Speedy Claxton 12.5 min 6.2 pts 1.0 rbs 1.5 ast

I'm with SFIE in having Sean Elliott be my all-time favorite Spur, but I think Tony Parker has actually been more important to the organization than Sean -- though I'll also agree that's close. Don't forget that along with all of the other fun things that Sean does and has done (and there's no doubt that the MDM is truly the turning point of the franchise's history) he was the Spurs publicity guy -- and a very good one -- during the Saddles and Spurs campaign, which was vital to keeping the Spurs in San Antonio, too. I'd say that's a pretty significant contribution.

On the down side, Sean Elliott is at least responisble by implication for the Dennis Rodman era -- speaking of which, no Will Perdue on the list of nominees??? And what about John Lucas?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MI21

Speedy Claxton is remembered as far better than what he was, that's for sure.
Let's just forget Tony's input in Games 1, 2, 3 and 5? He gets a pass for Game 4 like everyone else, because from memory, everyone was shit. Game 6 he was absolutely terrible. He was 21, 2nd year player going up against Jason Kidd, the guy everyone wanted the Spurs to sign to replace him. He did very, very well.

---

This post is spot on. People act like Claxton was a hero in that series, when it really wasn't that much. In the playoffs, Claxton shot a subpar percentage (42? 43?) and averaged 5 and 2. It had a couple good games out of 24.

But people really glorify it. Posters here actually say stuff like, "I remember Claxton came in and knocked down 3 after 3 while Parker sulked on the bench."

Note: Claxton didn't shoot a 3 in the postseason and was 0-11 from 3 in his Spurs career.

Anyway, back to the poll... I think I'm voting for Bruce.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurster

I don't think you can ignore the accomplishments of the Argentina team with Manu as its driving force. With that in mind, I voted for Manu.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPG21920

It clearly says most influential. So all things considered with the player must be taken into account. With Manu's fame in Argentina and in all Spanish speaking countries, his Olympic success and... that should be accounted for because it has shaped the Spurs and their fan base.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurster

Manu's international achievements ...

... shows that he is a great player without TD on the court.

... brings a lot of international visibility to the Spurs.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

With that line of thinking Tony should get votes for marrying Eva.

---

:lol True

If you are going to start giving bonus points for bringing international viewers, Mengke Bateer better be in the top ten because he brought more international viewers than anyone the Spurs ever signed. I don't see how international success means much of anything in terms of success during a player's Spurs career. If this poll were "best players who happened to also play with the Spurs", then this spot would probably be Moses Malone's with Dominique Wilkins and Artis Gilmore following him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kori Ellis

This post is spot on. People act like Claxton was a hero in that series, when it really wasn't that much. In the playoffs, Claxton shot a subpar percentage (42? 43?) and averaged 5 and 2. It had a couple good games out of 24.

---

It was 44% for the playoff run:

Claxton -- 24 games, 13.6 mpg, .438 FG, .000 3PT, .750 FT, 1.90 rpg, 1.9 apg, .67 spg, .21 bpg, 1.00 to/gm, 5.2 ppg

By round for Claxton:

v. PNX-- 6 gms, 17.0 mpg, .333 FG, .000 3PT, .714 FT, 1.70 rpg, 2.8 apg, .50 spg, 2.00 to/g, 5.0 ppg

v. LAL-- 6 gms, 12.2 mpg, .517 FG, .000 3PT, .750 FT, 1.50 rpg, 2.2 apg, .67 spg, .67 to/g, 6.5 ppg

v. DAL -- 6 gms, 12.7 mpg, .333 FG, .000 3PT, .833 FT, 3.3 rpg, 1.0 apg, .83 spg, .67 to/g, 3.2 ppg

v. NJN -- 6 gms, 12.5 mpg, .560 FG, .000 3PT, .750 FT, 1.0 rpg, 1.5 apg, .67 spg, .67 to/g, 6.2 ppg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

:lol True

If you are going to start giving bonus points for bringing international viewers, Mengke Bateer better be in the top ten because he brought more international viewers than anyone the Spurs ever signed. I don't see how international success means much of anything in terms of success during a player's Spurs career. If this poll were "best players who happened to also play with the Spurs", then this spot would probably be Moses Malone's with Dominique Wilkins and Artis Gilmore following him.

---

It has nothing to do with international viewers. It has to do with Spurs basketball. Manu not only has done well, but he has influenced fans, pulled them in and made a lot of money for the Spurs organizations. That is why you can include owners in the rankings.

Manu.

I imagine these polls and discussions are about to get tougher.

I voted Rodman

Ginobili has been the Spurs ultimate X Factor over the past 3-4 years. 05, he had one of the best postseason runs I've seen. 06, even though he was technically the one that people will point to who cost us a repeat with that Dirk foul, it was also his 3 point shot that led the Spurs into a tie and back into the game after being 20 down, 07 though Parker outplayed him in all 4 games of the finals, Ginobili was the X Factor against the Suns and Denver. 08, a healthy Ginobili would have beaten that Lakers team.

I love Parker and he's obviously the more consistent player, but in terms of the player who's had the bigger impact on the Spurs success these past few seasons, it's gotta be Ginobili. People are going to remember him a lot more not just for his clutchness over the years, but for the style of basketball he's brought to the Spurs, his unselfishness switching to 6th man, and the fact that as I mentioned, he's the ultimate X Factor the Spurs have ever had in the history of the team, I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by century

Manu. Parker is french and cannot be trusted. Crumbles under pressure too often.

---

This is like the Manu Fan go-to move to elevate Ginobili over Parker. It might have been fair to say that offensively during the 2005 run, however since then that logic has stuck even though it no longer is backed up by anything. Last three playoffs combined, Ginobili has shot lower than 30% in clutch situations. Last three playoffs combined, Parker has shot higher than 50% in clutch situations. Take out 2007 Cavs Game 4 and 2008 Suns Game 1 and Ginobili almost falls into the teens.

Even the last year in Game 7 against the Hornets, while Duncan and Ginobili were a combined 0-for-12 in the final 18 minutes of the game, Parker was 4-for-9 and hit the biggest shot of the game. However, none of this has stopped the "Manu is clutch, Parker is a choker" line that was originated in 2005.

The comparison is pretty damn close between the two but I haven't seen anything that elevates Ginobili over Parker. And considering Parker has been here a year longer and has been a major part of the team for two more years, Ginobili would have to have been substantially better since 2004 to make up for lost time ... and I just don't see it. You can argue that Manu has been a little bit better but that's about it.

Again, Manu is very likely the better player when both are completely healthy, Manu will undoubtedly be remembered as the better basketball player in the history books due to his great play in Europe, in the Olympics in and the NBA, and Manu might actually go down as the most popular Spurs player of all-time. But looking at strictly their Spurs careers season by season, I don't see how Ginobili beats out Parker.

But anyways, I never expected Parker to win this spot because Manu is one of the most beloved Spurs of all-time and Parker probably doesn't crack the top twenty. Not sure on the reasoning behind that phenomenon but it's true. Ginobili at six is fine ... much better than the voters who wanted him in the top three :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TMTTRIO

I think Manu should be up here somewhere with him but I think the only thing Manu's going to be recognized for with the Spurs is being the first scrub off the bench.

---

I did a double take when I saw that it was you who posted that. :wow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1Parker1

People are going to remember him a lot more not just for his clutchness over the years, but for the style of basketball he's brought to the Spurs, his unselfishness switching to 6th man, and the fact that as I mentioned, he's the ultimate X Factor the Spurs have ever had in the history of the team, I think.

---

Yes! :tu

Wow, school must be getting out; Manu's numbers have gone up astronomically in the past few mins. Either that or someone built a vote cruncher like the cheatin' aggrots did in their stupid best helmet poll.

Manu has it locked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1Parker1

Ginobili has been the Spurs ultimate X Factor over the past 3-4 years. 05, he had one of the best postseason runs I've seen. 06, even though he was technically the one that people will point to who cost us a repeat with that Dirk foul, it was also his 3 point shot that led the Spurs into a tie and back into the game after being 20 down, 07 though Parker outplayed him in all 4 games of the finals, Ginobili was the X Factor against the Suns and Denver. 08, a healthy Ginobili would have beaten that Lakers team.

I love Parker and he's obviously the more consistent player, but in terms of the player who's had the bigger impact on the Spurs success these past few seasons, it's gotta be Ginobili. People are going to remember him a lot more not just for his clutchness over the years, but for the style of basketball he's brought to the Spurs, his unselfishness switching to 6th man, and the fact that as I mentioned, he's the ultimate X Factor the Spurs have ever had in the history of the team, I think.

---

:tu

I voted for Silas, but Ginobli and Parker are so close in my rating that I could roll the dice. I lean toward Silas because I give extra value to peak, and any tiebreakers go to the older guy because too many don't value the past enough. Thorpe on ESPN won't put Wilt or O. on his top list because he didn't see them. Arrogance. I saw Silas. Silas merits #5. OTOH, Silas should not got below #8. Elliott the player is below. Add Elliott the announcer would make it a tough call.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptMike

Wow, school must be getting out; Manu's numbers have gone up astronomically in the past few mins. Either that or someone built a vote cruncher like the cheatin' aggrots did in their stupid best helmet poll.

---

So only kids getting out of school and a cheat would be a reason for Manu winning on this poll :nope:nope:rolleyes


LOL at Avery Johnson or Vinny getting a vote, some are funny :lol

Not as close as I thought it would be. I ultimately voted for Manu because of what he has done when he has been at his best. I can't guarantee I won't change my mind in a week.

When I voted this morning for Manu it was real close. I am suprised by the margin difference. Should be alot closer than it was for sure. Parker will be my next vote.

Manuuuuuuu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1Parker1

Ginobili has been the Spurs ultimate X Factor over the past 3-4 years. 05, he had one of the best postseason runs I've seen. 06, even though he was technically the one that people will point to who cost us a repeat with that Dirk foul, it was also his 3 point shot that led the Spurs into a tie and back into the game after being 20 down, 07 though Parker outplayed him in all 4 games of the finals, Ginobili was the X Factor against the Suns and Denver. 08, a healthy Ginobili would have beaten that Lakers team.

I love Parker and he's obviously the more consistent player, but in terms of the player who's had the bigger impact on the Spurs success these past few seasons, it's gotta be Ginobili. People are going to remember him a lot more not just for his clutchness over the years, but for the style of basketball he's brought to the Spurs, his unselfishness switching to 6th man, and the fact that as I mentioned, he's the ultimate X Factor the Spurs have ever had in the history of the team, I think.

---

I don't think calling Manu an x-factor is giving him enough respect as a player. An x-factor is a player you don't depend on to provide anything but if he does, he could prove to be the difference in winning. Someone like Jaren Jackson in '99 was an x-factor. Or Stephen Jackson in '03 was an x-factor. I see Manu more as one of the pieces to the foundation instead of just a wild card who may or may not play well.

If Manu is indeed an x-factor instead of a piece of the trustworthy foundation, that to me is more of a slight than a reason to praise him.

But whatever, there's no shame in Manu getting #6. Damn good player, amazingly unselfish and just wants to win. When he's on, there aren't five other players I'd rather have on the Spurs. Hell, even when he's off, I still want him on the floor.

:tu @ Manu

Probably X-factor is not the most appropriate term. In tennis lingo, I'd say Manu is the winner.:)

At least Manu will no longer be the list to skew the voting. :lol

I still think Tony deserves #6 over Manu due to his accomplishments and remaining potential, but I have no problem with them switching off the 6 and 7 spot.

Now comes the next big quandary....8: Bowen or Elliott?

How ironic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dex

At least Manu will no longer be the list to skew the voting. :lol

I still think Tony deserves #6 over Manu due to his accomplishments and remaining potential, but I have no problem with them switching off the 6 and 7 spot.

Now comes the next big quandary....8: Bowen or Elliott?

How ironic.

---

Assuming no voting shenanigans occur to keep Parker from winning spot #7. :hat