Dime: Is Tony Parker a franchise player?

Is Tony Parker a franchise player?
By Austin Burton

http://dimemag.com/wp-content/upload...parker-cd1.jpg
Steal this album...


Not that Tony Parker is sweating a 2010 All-Star snub — I’m guessing he’d rather spend the winter weekend curled up with Eva Longoria instead of getting booed every time he touches the ball in Spurs-hating Dallas — but TP nonetheless issued a late reminder yesterday that he shouldn’t be forgotten in All-Star talk.

On paper, Parker went against nemesis Chris Paul and gave him 25 points while snapping the Hornets’ seven-game home win streak. In reality, CP and TP rarely guarded each other; but no matter who was in front of him, Parker thrived. He scored 16 in the first half as the Spurs built a sizable lead, then added nine in the fourth quarter as his team withstood a late New Orleans rally.

Parker (16.8 ppg, 5.6 apg, 48% FG) isn’t necessarily having a down year — his numbers are right in line with his career averages — but he hasn’t been as explosive as he was last season when he set career-highs in scoring and assists and shot over 50 percent from the floor, either. Couple in that the Spurs (25-15) haven’t been as dominant as some predicted, and TP has gone back to being overlooked in those “Best point guard” arguments: During a recent Hornets/Pacers game, the Indiana broadcast ran a poll asking who is the NBA’s top PG, with Steve Nash, Jason Kidd and CP as the three options. No mention of the guy who has a trophy case all three of them would give a finger for.

But on a night like Monday, when TP is the best player on the floor, we get a look into the future, where Tony Parker is a marquee name and a franchise centerpiece. And where do the Spurs go from there?

Obviously, everything depends on Tim Duncan. Although he’s still putting up 20 points and 10 boards every night, Duncan does turn 34 in April, and the end of the road has to at least be in his vision. Duncan has two more years left on his contract; Parker has one. So when TP becomes a free agent in 2011 — knowing TD could only be in San Antonio for one year after that — would he want to go somewhere else and start fresh (a sign-and-trade to the Clippers for Baron Davis makes sense on multiple levels), or help Duncan go out on top and wait his turn to be The Man in San Antonio?

This might be the new Golden Era of point guards, but so far history shows teams constructed around a point guard don’t win championships. Isiah Thomas pulled it off with Detroit (‘89, ‘90), but since then, title teams have revolved around big men and wings. You could argue Chauncey Billups was the top player on the ‘04 Pistons, but he wasn’t the franchise guy. That team didn’t really have one, and Ben Wallace was the heart and soul. For today’s elite PG’s, the ones who are the focal points of their team find themselves in middle-of-the-pack situations or worse: Deron Williams (Jazz), Derrick Rose (Bulls), Brandon Jennings (Bucks), Chris Paul (Hornets), Tyreke Evans (Kings), and Gilbert Arenas (Wizards) before he found bigger problems to deal with. Nash’s Suns are looking strong this year, but we’ve been down that road before.

Can Tony Parker put up All-Star numbers as the centerpiece of a franchise? Sure. Can a team with Parker as the main guy contend for a ‘chip? As much as I like his game, I’d say no. If Parker is to add another ring to his collection post-Duncan, he’ll have to find another Duncan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duncan228

Is Tony Parker a franchise player?
By Austin Burton

http://dimemag.com/wp-content/upload...parker-cd1.jpg
Steal this album...

Parker (16.8 ppg, 5.6 apg, 48% FG) isn’t necessarily having a down year — his numbers are right in line with his career averages — but he hasn’t been as explosive as he was last season when he set career-highs in scoring and assists and shot over 50 percent from the floor, either. Couple in that the Spurs (25-15) haven’t been as dominant as some predicted, and TP has gone back to being overlooked in those “Best point guard” arguments: During a recent Hornets/Pacers game, the Indiana broadcast ran a poll asking who is the NBA’s top PG, with Steve Nash, Jason Kidd and CP as the three options. No mention of the guy who has a trophy case all three of them would give a finger for.

---

Well said this part. TP is really one of the best in the league. I think he is better than CP3. But other than that, not to go into that discussion, I think he just deserves more.

But he has always been a focus of criticizing from every angle. He is underrated and hated, even by Spurs own fanbase. He deserves more credit I think. Whatever TP does, good or great or wonderful, he never seems to do 'good enough' for most of the people. Why? I don't know, probably just the 'frenchie' thing.

Parker can put a lot of pressure on a defense because he can hurt you from a scoring standpoint. He can take over games in spurts, just like Manu can.

However, he's not a franchise player in my opinion. He's a scoring point guard, and isn't the greatest distributor. Don't get me wrong - I like him, and I realize that you can't have it all.

But here's an example -- If Chris Paul and Parker switched places this year, do you think the Hornets would have as many wins with Parker at the point? No, because he's not going to make that weak supporting cast that much better. He'd probably average 23-24 a game, but opponents would let him have it if the other guys did nothing.

I know a lot of people have remarked how great Chris Paul would be on the Spurs, and I agree. However, the value of Paul would making guys like RJ get more touches in a position to score. He could run that alley-oop play with Mahinmi like he used to run with Tyson Chandler. Have we heard anything from Chandler this year? No, and that's because Paul made him significantly better. Parker is good, but he's not the same type of PG that Paul is. Chandler was almost an all-star level center with Chris Paul feeding him bunnies. Now the guy is an afterthought.

No.

There is only one franchise player on this team: TIMOTHY DUNCAN.

Paul is more dependent on his teammates, he needs the others to set screens while Parker with his quickness can drive by himself past every defender.

Spurs franchise player: Michael Finley when he is not playing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bukefal

Paul is more dependent on his teammates, he needs the others to set screens while Parker with his quickness can drive by himself past every defender.

---

That has to be the stupidest argument I have ever read on ST.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

That has to be the stupidest argument I have ever read on ST.

---

:lmao And thats sayin something!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

That has to be the stupidest argument I have ever read on ST.

---

Well, maybe you can vote for me to get a spur now :lol

But I think so, tony is better in penetrating to the bucket and a better ballhandler and scorer. But Paul is a better passer and defender though.


It was not an argument for chris paul or tony parker being a franchise player or not.

I was saying who is better in my eyes and why

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

That has to be the stupidest argument I have ever read on ST.

---

I agree :lol

Tony Parker is not a franchise player, but he is a very good one.

He's a lot like Amare Stoudemire: he might be the highest scorer on many nights, but he's not the most important piece.

Well isnt it that paul is the hornets. That all the plays are set up for him? Pick and roll. That's the only way he is solid in ending plays.

While TP does more on his own, he is more independent and better penetration to the basket.

Of course he's not a franchise player.

How many real franchise players are in the league right now ?

Lebron James
Kobe Bryant
Tim Duncan
Dirk Nowitski
Dwight Howard
Dwyane Wade
Chris Paul
Kevin Garnett (when healthy)

Then you have the almost franchise players

Pau Gasol
Brandon Roy
Chris Bosh
Carmelo Anthony
Kevin Durant
Steve Nash
Deron Williams
Amare Stoudemire
Joe Johnson
Paul Pierce

Parker & Ginobili were in that 2nd group when healthy, but absolutely not this year !

Not sure about C Paul yet, his team has not achieved much compared to the teams of the other Franchise Players you mention.

Anyway, as for Paul being a franchise player, I dont know, he is the best player on his team, but being a franchise player isnt about being the best on your team, but then again, he is the drive behind it.

And Tony, he can be, but certainly not now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timaios

Of course he's not a franchise player.

How many real franchise players are in the league right now ?

Lebron James
Kobe Bryant
Tim Duncan
Dirk Nowitski
Dwight Howard
Dwyane Wade
Chris Paul
Kevin Garnett (when healthy)

Then you have the almost franchise players

Pau Gasol
Brandon Roy
Chris Bosh
Carmelo Anthony
Kevin Durant
Steve Nash
Deron Williams
Amare Stoudemire
Joe Johnson
Paul Pierce

Parker & Ginobili were in that 2nd group when healthy, but absolutely not this year !

---

Well said.

I think Parker is generally under rated and is much more of a team guy than some on this board seems to think. But he's hurting this year.

I'd like him stay after his contract is up. It might depend on how Tim is playing and if he decides to extend. If Tim is still Tim and will be here a while we've a better chance of keeping Tony.

I'm not going to argue your opinion that TP is better than Paul, you're entitled to your own opinion, but Paul doesn't "need" a screen..that's the style of play he enjoys playing, the Hornets enjoy playing at an extremely slow pace, and Paul generally uses screens with West to set up a mismatch for West and he used to use them with Chandler to set up easy alley-oops, since Chandler was useless offensively outside of that..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bukefal

Paul is more dependent on his teammates,

---

What? Along with everything else Paul does better than Parker, he's also a better scorer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timaios

Of course he's not a franchise player.

How many real franchise players are in the league right now ?

Lebron James
Kobe Bryant
Tim Duncan
Dirk Nowitski
Dwight Howard
Dwyane Wade
Chris Paul
Kevin Garnett (when healthy)

Then you have the almost franchise players

Pau Gasol
Brandon Roy
Chris Bosh
Carmelo Anthony
Kevin Durant
Steve Nash
Deron Williams
Amare Stoudemire
Joe Johnson
Paul Pierce

Parker & Ginobili were in that 2nd group when healthy, but absolutely not this year !

---

I'd move Roy and Durant up to the top group and Pau might be there too, the way he was playing before he was injured.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dirk4mvp

What? Along with everything else Paul does better than Parker, he's also a better scorer.

---

You all dont really seem to get me. Paul puts up more numbers, because everything is envolving about him. I do think that Paul is a better defender and passer than Tony is, but I think tony is a better scorer and he is better in penetrating in the basket in offense. For Paul it's all pick/screen and roll, plays for him, that's the only way he is solid and dangerous, in that way tp is more independent, creates himself a way to the basket.

I hope not, franchises who have their franchise player at pg suck ass

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bukefal

You all dont really seem to get me. Paul puts up more numbers, because everything is envolving about him. I do think that Paul is a better defender and passer than Tony is, but I think tony is a better scorer and he is better in penetrating in the basket in offense. For Paul it's all pick/screen and roll, plays for him, that's the only way he is solid and dangerous, in that way tp is more independent, creates himself a way to the basket.

---

Paul receives way more defensive attention from teams, yet still averages more ppg, while shooting at a higher FG%, and a much higher 3% and FT%.

Parker isnt a franchise player.

hell of a player, but not franchise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stretch

Parker isnt a franchise player.

hell of a player, but not franchise

---

this.

Is he a franchise player? Yes...just not the Spurs franchise.

No. All Star when healthy, but not franchise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

That has to be the stupidest argument I have ever read on ST.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tp2021

:lmao And thats sayin something!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lefty

I agree :lol

---

I wasnt saying that as an argument if tony parker is a franchise player and Paul is not, but I was saying that, to say Parker is a better player than Paul and why he is.

Anyway I think the only true franchise players in the NBA are just Kobe, Lebron, Duncan, Wade and Howard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bukefal

I wasnt saying that as an argument if tony parker is a franchise player and Paul is not, but I was saying that, to say Parker is a better player than Paul and why he is.

---

Still, saying that a guy is better than another 'cause one doesn't need a screen and the other does is dumb, and on this particular case is even dumber 'cause is not true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

Still, saying that a guy is better than another 'cause one doesn't need a screen and the other does is dumb, and on this particular case is even dumber 'cause is not true.

---

I think Paul is not that good as everybody sees him. as I said about this

Paul puts up more numbers, because everything is envolving about him. Everything is set up for him. I do think that Paul is a better defender and passer than Tony is, but I think tony is a better scorer and he is better in penetrating in the basket in offense.

For Paul it's all pick/screen and roll, plays for him, that's the only way he is solid and dangerous, in that way tp is more independent, creates himself a way to the basket.

Also I think if Paul would have been playing for the spurs, with the rest everything the same. He would be very dissapointing

bukafen is the french version of the rabid argy manu>dirk fan. Still, to say that parker>paul...(because paul needs "screens".....rofl)....probably almost as bad as those shitheads on LG saying kobe>jordan. Serious question here: does anyone that actually watch chris paul seriously think he's not every bit as good a finisher/penetration/scorer as chris paul is? His team needs him to be more of a distributer, that's all. P.S right now, I'm not sure parker is even the top 5 best pg in the league. Deron Paul Nash Rondo Parker?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bukefal

I think Paul is not that good as everybody sees him. as I said about this

Paul puts up more numbers, because everything is envolving about him. Everything is set up for him. I do think that Paul is a better defender and passer than Tony is, but I think tony is a better scorer and he is better in penetrating in the basket in offense.

For Paul it's all pick/screen and roll, plays for him, that's the only way he is solid and dangerous, in that way tp is more independent, creates himself a way to the basket.

---

Paul uses the pick and roll 'cause that way he is able to create plays for him and/or his teammates, but that doesn't mean he can't create for himself on isolation plays, besides when do you see Tony going one on one on games? That's not Spurs ball, 90% of Tony's plays in the halfcourt come from the pick and roll.

Paul besides beign a better defender and passer (acording to you) is a better shooter-

CP3- 49 FG% - 42 3pt% - 84 FT%
Tony- 48 FG% - 30 3pt% - 76 FT%

And a more efficient scorer-

CP3- 19.5 pts in 14 FG attemps (1.3 pts per att)
Tony- 16.8 pts in 13 FG attempts (1.2 pts per att)

I really can't see how you think that Tony is better than CP3 right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bukefal

Well said this part. TP is really one of the best in the league. I think he is better than CP3. But other than that, not to go into that discussion, I think he just deserves more.

But he has always been a focus of criticizing from every angle. He is underrated and hated, even by Spurs own fanbase. He deserves more credit I think. Whatever TP does, good or great or wonderful, he never seems to do 'good enough' for most of the people. Why? I don't know, probably just the 'frenchie' thing.

---

Floor general>scoring point guard. Parker is great. But he doesn't make the other around him better. Cp3 does. If we had paul this year you can damn there hand us the lob. Hed make everyone on this squad better. Parker is not a franchise player. Tim has been a blessing. Gonna be tough to see him clock out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadOdor

bukafen is the french version of the rabid argy manu>dirk fan. Still, to say that parker>paul...(because paul needs "screens".....rofl)....probably almost as bad as those shitheads on LG saying kobe>jordan. Serious question here: does anyone that actually watch chris paul seriously think he's not every bit as good a finisher/penetration/scorer as chris paul is? His team needs him to be more of a distributer, that's all. P.S right now, I'm not sure parker is even the top 5 best pg in the league. Deron Paul Nash Rondo Parker?

---

Manu would facerape Dirk on his prime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadOdor

bukafen is the french version of the rabid argy manu>dirk fan. Still, to say that parker>paul...(because paul needs "screens".....rofl)....probably almost as bad as those shitheads on LG saying kobe>jordan. Serious question here: does anyone that actually watch chris paul seriously think he's not every bit as good a finisher/penetration/scorer as chris paul is? His team needs him to be more of a distributer, that's all. P.S right now, I'm not sure parker is even the top 5 best pg in the league. Deron Paul Nash Rondo Parker?

---

Yup im French :lol

But then again, you also think uruguayans are 'argies'. :toast

anyway, I just dont think so. Im talking about in general, not about right right now. This season Parker hasnt been so well, not on his best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

Manu would facerape Dirk on his prime.

---

rabid argy fan = case in point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bukefal

Yup im French :lol

But then again, you also think uruguayans are 'argies'. :toast

anyway, I just dont think so. Im talking about in general, not about right right now. This season Parker hasnt been so well, not on his best.

---

What reason did you have to say that if paul played on the spurs, he would be "disappointing" like parker? (other than your french bias, of course).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadOdor

rabid argy fan = case in point.

---

I took a chapter from the Mavs fans' book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurspokesman

Floor general>scoring point guard. Parker is great. But he doesn't make the other around him better. Cp3 does. If we had paul this year you can damn there hand us the lob. Hed make everyone on this squad better. Parker is not a franchise player. Tim has been a blessing. Gonna be tough to see him clock out.

---

Again, im not talking about Parker being a franchise player and paul not. Parker isnt a franchise player, I agree. CP3 = the hornets, he leads the whole team, with us its different, we have a bunch of quality players, they dont.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadOdor

What reason did you have to say that if paul played on the spurs, he would be "disappointing" like parker? (other than your french bias, of course).

---

Because if he was at the spurs, it wouldnt be all involving around him. he wouldnt be the main focus of the team. His number would go down drastically. TP can also put up high numbers up every game, but it doesnt fit in the spurs system

no. he might not even be an all star this yr

might? He won't.

How come it's always Parker compared to CP, Nash, or Kidd?

How bout comparing Manu to Kobe, James?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gilmor

How come it's always Parker compared to CP, Nash, or Kidd?

How bout comparing Manu to Kobe, James?

---

Why would you compare a scrub shooting 40% from the field averaging barely over 10 ppg to the 2 best players in the game today? lol crazed argy fans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gilmor

How come it's always Parker compared to CP, Nash, or Kidd?

How bout comparing Manu to Kobe, James?

---

'Cause Manu comes off the bench, plays less than 30 minutes per game and takes only 9 shots per game and let's be honest isn't playing all that well right now, besides Kobe/James >>>>> Any of those PG, either way in 2008 (Manu's best statistical season) he was considered the 2nd best SG in the league and a lot of people were comparing him to Kobe (not me), the funny thing is that 2008 wasn't his best season but people only look at stats.

Not totally sure, but I believe these are the only starting point guards to win a ring over the last 30 years.
Derek Fischer
Rajon Rondo
Tony Parker
Chancey Billups
Jason Williams
Avery Johnson
bj armstrong
Ron Harper
Kenny Smith
Isiah Thomas
Magic Johnson
Dennis Johnson
Maurice Cheeks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadOdor

Why would you compare a scrub shooting 40% from the field averaging barely over 10 ppg to the 2 best players in the game today? lol crazed argy fans.

---

Geography fail. You know you can move your cursor towards the flag under the poster's avatar, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadOdor

Why would you compare a scrub shooting 40% from the field averaging barely over 10 ppg to the 2 best players in the game today? lol crazed argy fans.

---

See that flag under my avatar, that's an Argentinian flag, the flag under gilmor's avatar is a Philipinian one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

'Cause Manu comes off the bench, plays less than 30 minutes per game and takes only 9 shots per game and let's be honest isn't playing all that well right now, besides Kobe/James >>>>> Any of those PG, either way in 2008 (Manu's best statistical season) he was considered the 2nd best SG in the league and a lot of people were comparing him to Kobe (not me), the funny thing is that 2008 wasn't his best season but people only look at stats.

---

Exactly, then why do you back your argument up with stats with a slight difference to show paul is better? plus, especially at this moment when tp is having troubles. It doesnt say always anything you know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadOdor

bukafen is the french version of the rabid argy manu>dirk fan. Still, to say that parker>paul...(because paul needs "screens".....rofl)....probably almost as bad as those shitheads on LG saying kobe>jordan. Serious question here: does anyone that actually watch chris paul seriously think he's not every bit as good a finisher/penetration/scorer as chris paul is? His team needs him to be more of a distributer, that's all. P.S right now, I'm not sure parker is even the top 5 best pg in the league. Deron Paul Nash Rondo Parker?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bukefal

Yup im French :lol

But then again, you also think uruguayans are 'argies'. :toast

anyway, I just dont think so. Im talking about in general, not about right right now. This season Parker hasnt been so well, not on his best.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadOdor

What reason did you have to say that if paul played on the spurs, he would be "disappointing" like parker? (other than your french bias, of course).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadOdor

Why would you compare a scrub shooting 40% from the field averaging barely over 10 ppg to the 2 best players in the game today? lol crazed argy fans.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chieflion

Geography fail. You know you can move your cursor towards the flag under the poster's avatar, right?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

See that flag under my avatar, that's an Argentinian flag, the flag under gilmor's avatar is a Philipinian one.

---

:lol badodor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bukefal

Exactly, then why do you back your argument up with stats with a slight difference to show paul is better? plus, especially at this moment when tp is having troubles. It doesnt say always anything you know.

---

Total (or raw) stats are crap, stats that show the efficiency of a player (while not completely good) are a somewhat more decent indicator of reality. Besides those stats don't show that CP3 is slightly better right now, they show that he's better on almost every single aspect of the game.

Paul like Nash are nasty ballhandlers. It's hard to make either one of these guys pick up their dribble and from penetrating any defense you throw at them. And their vision though I think Nash's is better is deadly. You make a mistake and both of them will make you pay. I think Pauls temperment hurts him, and Nash of course is not a defensive standout but both bring so much on the offensive end it really doesn't matter. The other guys can play defense, these two guys are needed to run their teams offenses.
Tony has great dribbling skills, but he tends to pick up his dribble, though not as much as he used to and he will never be the creator that NAsh and Paul or even Manu are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timaios

Of course he's not a franchise player.

How many real franchise players are in the league right now ?

Lebron James
Kobe Bryant
Tim Duncan
Dirk Nowitski
Dwight Howard
Dwyane Wade
Chris Paul
Kevin Garnett (when healthy)

Then you have the almost franchise players

Pau Gasol
Brandon Roy
Chris Bosh
Carmelo Anthony
Kevin Durant
Steve Nash
Deron Williams
Amare Stoudemire
Joe Johnson
Paul Pierce

Parker & Ginobili were in that 2nd group when healthy, but absolutely not this year !

---

Nice list. I would pretty much agree with the list and your take.

Parker the last 2007-2009 was good enough to be a franchise player on a mediocre team. His effectiveness depends a lot on who's defending him and if they're fast enough to stay in front of him. Parker, at his best, can destroy a team that doesn't have the right player to defend him. But there are some defenders who can limit him, or if they really key in on him and apply pressure, he can be limited.

thought carmelo and durant would be up top? Tony was Finals MVP..that mean anything?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lefty

Spurs franchise player: Michael Finley when he is not playing

---

agree +200

i dont think tony is a franchise player, yes hes very good only when hes scoring, if hes not scoring he really becomes worthless unlike ginobili and timmy. please if you think im being irrational tell me how he helps if he doesnt score the ball well! tony is really more of a follower and could have been a leader but doesnt want the role. i think its because he cant handle the pressure. so with that said hell no hes not a franchise player

I think if Tony had the chance to go to the Lakers or Knicks he wouldn't care if he was a franchise player or not. He'd be in a bigger market and it would make sense for Eva's career. I really don't see him staying in SA until retirement, but as good a player as he is, I think he can compliment a team, but not build one.

If you consider Chris Paul a franchise player then yes, I think Tony Parker could be as well if given the chance.

While Paul is the craftier passer by a significant margin Tony is the better penetrator and finisher at the time. This leads to a significant difference in style of play. While Paul can better find teammates in advantageous positions to score (finding cutters and throwing alley oops and such), Parker will create better looks for his teammates by his drives into the paint (and the subsequent collapse of the defense to stop him, leaving an open man). Different methods but ultimately similar results. If Tony was given the amount of control that Paul has I think you would see similar stats (in points and assists).

Defensively its a wash. Both are solid though not spectacular defenders. Paul gambles for steals sometimes with good results while Parker is perhaps more fundamentally sound.

Paul is the better shooter of the two and this is where he edges out Parker in my opinion. If Parker were to further increase the accuracy of his outside shot I think he may become even more dangerous then Paul because of speed and agility while driving to the hoop. He would really be a nightmare to defend (if he wasn't already).

With all that said, if Parker were to become a "franchise player" I do not think he would ever be able to win another title, and the same goes for Chris Paul or any other current point guard in the league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stretch

Parker isnt a franchise player.

hell of a player, but not franchise

---

+1

Can you build a team around him? Yes.

Will it be a good team? No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superjames1992

There is only one franchise player on this team: TIMOTHY DUNCAN.

---

TRUE INDEED, good article too! He is the only one on this team who is elite HOF and a franchise guy! TIMMAY is the best PF ever, peace.

he looked like it last season.

but nowhere near that now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lefty

Spurs franchise player: Michael Finley when he is not playing

---

Lmao, Id have To Go With Matt Bonner!

I agree with the poster who said that there are very few real franchise players in the NBA, and the list was spot on except for Chris Paul, who I'd put in the 2nd category with TP - this is based on the fact that CP has accomplished nothing on a team level except leading the Hornets to a few early playoff exits - I'm sure TP would be able to do exactly the same with the same cast. For the same reason I'd remove Garnett from the 1st category

To summarize:
- tier 1 = players who can bring their team to the NBA Finals whatever the surrounding cast (which excludes Paul or Garnett)
- tier 2 = players who can bring their team to the playoffs regardless of cast, or even deep playoffs runs in good years

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

I agree with the poster who said that there are very few real franchise players in the NBA, and the list was spot on except for Chris Paul, who I'd put in the 2nd category with TP - this is based on the fact that CP has accomplished nothing on a team level except leading the Hornets to a few early playoff exits - I'm sure TP would be able to do exactly the same with the same cast. For the same reason I'd remove Garnett from the 1st category

To summarize:
- tier 1 = players who can bring their team to the NBA Finals whatever the surrounding cast (which excludes Paul or Garnett)-
tier 2 = players who can bring their team to the playoffs regardless of cast, or even deep playoffs runs in good years

---

That kind of player doesn't exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pentagruel

If you consider Chris Paul a franchise player then yes, I think Tony Parker could be as well if given the chance.

While Paul is the craftier passer by a significant margin Tony is the better penetrator and finisher at the time. This leads to a significant difference in style of play. While Paul can better find teammates in advantageous positions to score (finding cutters and throwing alley oops and such), Parker will create better looks for his teammates by his drives into the paint (and the subsequent collapse of the defense to stop him, leaving an open man). Different methods but ultimately similar results. If Tony was given the amount of control that Paul has I think you would see similar stats (in points and assists).

Defensively its a wash. Both are solid though not spectacular defenders. Paul gambles for steals sometimes with good results while Parker is perhaps more fundamentally sound.

Paul is the better shooter of the two and this is where he edges out Parker in my opinion. If Parker were to further increase the accuracy of his outside shot I think he may become even more dangerous then Paul because of speed and agility while driving to the hoop. He would really be a nightmare to defend (if he wasn't already).

With all that said, if Parker were to become a "franchise player" I do not think he would ever be able to win another title, and the same goes for Chris Paul or any other current point guard in the league.

---

Exactly, because the hornets involve all around paul. That doesnt mean Paul is better, it's just because he is main thing in the team, hence why he is putting up more numbers than TP. If Paul would have played for the spurs, his numbers would go down drastically, because it's not about him anymore. And the other way around, if Parker would have been the main thing on the team, his numbers would be increasing alot. Parker can also put higher numbers, but it isnt about that in the spurs system.

So Paul depends more on what others on his team create for him, everything goes to and thru him. But when that's not the case anymore, Paul will be dissapointing and I think less better than TP, because TP is a better finisher and penetration he can do more by himself.

Except for defense though, Paul is a better defender.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

That kind of player doesn't exist.

---

LeBron James on the 2007 Cavaliers is that player. He said make the finals, not win. One might argue about the supporting cast, but that is ok, he made the finals, that is all I am asking.

A franchise player like Tim ? of course not.

i would agree with timaios post about two groups of star players, and TP belonging to the second one.

but for me, among the current players, i see only three real franchise players: Tim, LBJ and Shaq in his prime. that's it.



CP3 is an incredible player but, if like me, you're convinced that apg is a overrated stat, you should think that CP3 is an overrated player, especially as a winning franchise player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

Total (or raw) stats are crap, stats that show the efficiency of a player (while not completely good) are a somewhat more decent indicator of reality. Besides those stats don't show that CP3 is slightly better right now, they show that he's better on almost every single aspect of the game.

---

what were those stats saying in the last PO, when it matters the most and with the two players healthy ?

i think that CP3 at his best is better than TP at his best. but his APG thing and his defense are overrated.

This days undersize players can`t be named as franchise players. Or wait. Arenas is a franchise player for Wizards, cause they`ll be playing him for 6 more years.

For Spurs franchise player is a player, which whole roster is being built on for years. This player is Tim Duncan. Parker is All-Star, but not a franchise player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timaios

Of course he's not a franchise player.

How many real franchise players are in the league right now ?

Lebron James
Kobe Bryant
Tim Duncan
Dirk Nowitski
Dwight Howard
Dwyane Wade
Chris Paul
Kevin Garnett (when healthy)

Then you have the almost franchise players

Pau Gasol
Brandon Roy
Chris Bosh
Carmelo Anthony
Kevin Durant
Steve Nash
Deron Williams
Amare Stoudemire
Joe Johnson
Paul Pierce

Parker & Ginobili were in that 2nd group when healthy, but absolutely not this year !

---

it's a good list. I'd say Gasol Durant (potentially) are the closest to the first group and paul garnet are borderline. We could go with 3 groups

Lebron James
Kobe Bryant
Tim Duncan
Dirk Nowitski
Dwight Howard
Dwyane Wade


Chris Paul
Kevin Garnett (when healthy)
Pau Gasol
Kevin Durant


Brandon Roy
Chris Bosh
Carmelo Anthony
Steve Nash
Deron Williams
Paul Pierce

and for me stoud and johnson are not in these 3 groups

Franchise players should entirely be devoted to the NBA. Parker has shown a Yao like approach to his basketball career by trying to do too much with his time. Its hard to maintain your focus for the whole year and stay at your peak while doing so.

I can't think any real good franchise player who also competes year in and out with Fifa ball, how often does Dirk play for Germany?

I was never a fan of TP's game. He is very good, but a FP? He had a great couple of years, but a LOT of that feeds off Tim and Manu.
I put him in the same realm as Rondo. Definitely value added, but perhaps gets a bit too much credit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brazil

it's a good list. I'd say Gasol Durant (potentially) are the closest to the first group and paul garnet are borderline. We could go with 3 groups

Lebron James
Kobe Bryant
Tim Duncan
Dirk Nowitski
Dwight Howard
Dwyane Wade


Chris Paul
Kevin Garnett (when healthy)
Pau Gasol
Kevin Durant


Brandon Roy
Chris Bosh
Carmelo Anthony
Steve Nash
Deron Williams
Paul Pierce

and for me stoud and johnson are not in these 3 groups

---

There is no way Pau Gasol, a guy who won 0 playoff games before getting paired with Kobe, is in the 2nd tier and Melo and Nash aren't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacobdrj

I was never a fan of TP's game. He is very good, but a FP? He had a great couple of years, but a LOT of that feeds off Tim and Manu

---

Tony had his BEST season last year when both Tim and Manu were hurt and less efficient than norm.

Your comment doesn't hold much water.

When Parker isn't scoring, he really doesn't do anything exceptionally well on a consistent basis to justify being a franchise player. There have been very few small players who can be called franchise players. Unfortunately size has a lot to do with it. Was it Chuck Daley who told Isiah Thomas that it was too bad he wasn't 6 inches taller because at that size and with his talent, he'd be the best BB player in the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacobdrj

I put him in the same realm as Rondo. Definitely value added, but perhaps gets a bit too much credit.

---

Nah, Rondo's better cause he actually plays defense and tries to get his team involved in the offense. TP's a fringe all-star. He's amazing when his offense is on but he's not a good enough player to build a franchise with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigz

Tony had his BEST season last year when both Tim and Manu were hurt and less efficient than norm.

Your comment doesn't hold much water.

---

Best season when your team go home in the first round.That's one of the reason why TP isn't a franchise player.

I can't imagine a good team with TD at best going home in the first round.

I'm sure that the Spurs with CP3 at PG would be the best team of the NBA right now.Blair,Jefferson,Hill,Mason,Duncan,Manu,Dice... . Paul never has that talent around him.What can i say of Nash?? He is going to make all stars players like Frie or Dudley...

TP can't be a franchise player if he isnt able to put this team in the top of the west.


And I can't imagine how many points per game could score TD if he had played with Nash or Paul.Karl Malone was better than he really was because he played with Stockton.Of course the same for David West,Boozer or Stoudemire. I'm sure TD would be the same without Tony.He was before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigz

Tony had his BEST season last year when both Tim and Manu were hurt and less efficient than norm.

Your comment doesn't hold much water.

---

Statistically last season was his best when they were out. But his best seasons on the floor from a basketball perspective were over the past 3 years when he could feed off the other 2. Last season showed he could be a stat grabber on a mediocre team. My comment holds plenty of water.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnny RIngo

Nah, Rondo's better cause he actually plays defense and tries to get his team involved in the offense. TP's a fringe all-star. He's amazing when his offense is on but he's not a good enough player to build a franchise with.

---

I would argue that RR is to defense as TP is to offense.