Printable View
TL is identically a Aaron Brooks kind of PG except inferior shooting skills. Both have decent assists number but that's mostly benefits of their attacking abilities, with which they always make open rooms for teammates by creasing up the opponent defense. If the ball moves sluggishly around the arc without such a slasher as TL, the shooters won't work so well as expected IMHO.
injuries...thats all what it is
Disagree. Tony excels as the first option. He does not setup teamates well. When TP leads the break, if he takes the shot himself, count two. If he tries to run a 2-3 man break, count the botched opportunity/TO. That has always been the case, as they say "aint nothin' changed."Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Partly true...his shooting has dried up. TP will always have the ability to finish at the bucket. The problem comes in when the only thing TP can do for us is take the ball, drive to the cup and lay it in. It takes it's toll on Tony, and our team defense suffers IMO. When Tony takes over at the offensive end stops seem to happen alot less frequently. We seem to wind up going back and forth with teams and losing leads in the third and fourth quarters.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
The key here is looking at the consistency in Spurs play over four quarters while Tony is out. I think Hill gives them a defensive presence throughout the game that allows us to hold leads, and chip away at deficits when we have to. Less eratic play.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Hill has shown he can run the point so Pop does in fact have the option.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Bottom line, twenty points a game can be made up, especially with Hill continuing to prosper in his role. It's not as though Parker brings alot of intangibles. He scores at will. No more, no less. The drawback is that with him on the court, other players are not consistently involved, and our D has also been up and down.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Again, he struggles to find his teamates in any situations other than spot up jump shot situations. When he is on the bench and Manu runs the show, the ball flows from side to side far easier, and players begin to find their groove in the offense. So, strictly as a PG, he not as great as advertised here.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Last year it was. This year, we are all hoping to see a better team offense, something that will hopefully produce better results than last year.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Agreed, except if you need a setup man vs. a lightning fast scoring PG. Then he's not the guy you need. Not every elite player fits every situation. Bird could never have fit in a "Showtime" offense.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
If you have been following the Spurs as long as some of us, TP is a "New Age" Spur.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Fault his lack of defense on a team predicated on D and a fanbase who appreciates stops.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
I would take the little general in his prime over TP this year if the goal is to get all this talent working together and deep in the playoffs. If I want someone who makes highlight plays consistently, I'll take TP.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
When you expend as much energy on the defensive end as Hill, you've earned a few shots.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37
crofl that' the best your nerdy ass could come up with?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cry Havoc
TP doesn't just excel at the first option. Throughout the years, he's been the first option at times but he smoothly transitions to being the second or third option. That's one his strongest assets. There aren't many All-Star level point guards who would willingly let others (mostly Manu and TD) take over the lead of the offense for quarters at a time. So yeah, he excels as the first option but also can shift gears and play off the ball without his ego getting in the way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker2112
Saying he doesn't setup his teammates well is comical considering the other players on this team. Manu sets up teammates well (but his drop in athleticism this year has turned him into more of a passer than a playmaker). Who else on this team sets up teammates? Certainly not Hill. TP isn't exactly John Stockton but he's far and away in the top two when it comes to playmaking and passing.
As far as fast breaks are concerned, that hasn't been a problem over the years. Yeah, Parker runs ugly fast breaks that make purists cringe but he makes the layup at a very high rate. A Parker one-man fast break is as efficient as any other type of fast break this team runs. Not as pretty but still effective.
That is some weird logic. The defense is bad because TP doesn't run the offense correctly? Doesn't make much sense. The defense has been great in years Parker was much less of a player.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker2112
The day the defense depends on what is happening on the offensive end is the day the Spurs are no longer capable of playing championship caliber defense.
What games are you using to judge the "consistency" when TP is out? The previous three games before the Memphis game that TP missed resulted in the Spurs averaging 89 points per game. And again, if you want to use the small sample sizes, the Spurs are 3-0 without Duncan and 4-1 without Ginobili. Using your logic, the Spurs should get rid of those two players.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker2112
I like Hill but he's nowhere near the level of Parker. The Spurs wouldn't have won any of their championships with Hill as their starting PG and would have no chance this year if Hill is their long-term starting PG. Contrived "consistency" or not.
:lol Hill hasn't shown that. In fact, he may have proven the opposite this year. There was hope he could evolve into a point guard in his second season but he's shown to be a smallish shooting guard with good ballhandling ability. He doesn't make plays like a point guard. He doesn't pass like a point guard. In a vast majority of halfcourt sets Hill is involved in, he relinquishes the role of point guard. If Manu (or even RMJ) is on the court with Hill at the same time, Manu is the point guard in non-transition situations. Last game, Duncan ran the show from the high post most of the time when Hill was in the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker2112
Perhaps Hill may grow into being a point guard but right now him "playing point guard" results in Hill either driving all the way for a layup in transition or handing the ball off to someone else to make a play.
Yes, 20 point per game point guards who shoot at a high percentage, don't have any problem deferring, are equipped with championship experience and have a history of stepping up their defense in the playoffs grow on trees. Good point.Quote:
Bottom line, twenty points a game can be made up, especially with Hill continuing to prosper in his role.
Again, Manu is a freak of nature. He's arguably the best passing shooting guard on the planet. Comparing Parker (or anyone else in the league outside of a handful of players) to Manu in that category isn't fair. Manu is a damn good passer who is passing way better than any point in his career.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker2112
That said, Parker is the second best on the team in that category. It's not like Hill or anyone else comes into the game and is in Manu's league. When it comes to penetration and kick, Parker is the best on the team. When it comes to running the pick-and-roll with Duncan, Parker is elite. When it comes to straight up court vision, TP is second to Manu -- with third being far away.
Last year? Parker being able to get to the rim and score has been the lifeblood of the offense since 2003. It has been the easiest form of Spurs offense over the years and it's the first thing opponents have to plan against.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker2112
If the Spurs will be championship contenders this year, Parker's scoring ability will play a big part in that.
I don't understand the Spurs fans who believe the Spurs need to change their whole philosophy because they brought in Richard Jefferson. He's Richard Jefferson, not Kobe Bryant or LeBron James. RJ was brought in to add to the mix and play a supporting role to the Big 3 -- not change the team from Big 3 centric to some sort of Showtime knockoff.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker2112
The Spurs will still live and die by the Big 3.
Okay?Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker2112
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Parker2112
Parker's defense hasn't been a problem over the years. In the 2005 and 2007 championship runs, he played good (sometimes great) defense. Outside of Bowen, he was oftentimes the second player Pop turned to for good man-to-man defense.
It's true that Parker has had a tendency to slack off defensively in the regular season over the years but come important games, TP almost always steps it up on D.
As for Hill, his defense is the most overrated aspect of his game. He can be a good defender and sometimes is a good defender ... but he can also be exploited at times. Even this year with Parker hobbled, the Spurs still give up fewer points when Parker is in the game compared to when Hill is in the game.
:lmao AJ > Parker? That is hilarious ... even though I might be the biggest AJ homer on the forum. Parker this year is better than AJ ever was in his prime. A healthy Parker blow AJ out of the water.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker2112
And since when does TP make highlight plays? He might be the most boring star point guard of all-time. That's part of the reason why New Age Spurs fans underrate him ... his game consists of shooting open jumpers, making the boring pass and driving to the lane for layups. Hardly highlight inducing.
nice troll attempt Parker2112
Goddamnit this is a great post. Tony Parker's one of the greatest things to ever happen to this team.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Tony Parker IS an All-Star player. His contributions can't be appreciated enough.
That said.
This team would do better IMO if he were to ever be traded for another athletic big to play alongside Duncan.
The guards the team has now would more than be fine. It's not like the team would fall apart without Tony...However...the Spurs without Tony Parker while adding another young athletic big would be better.
Again...this is not a knock on Tony...It's, IMO, what would make the Spurs better as a team and have a better shot at winning the title.
What big would you trade him for?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpurNation
It's weird to me that everyone is praising the Spurs awesome D yesterday with Tony out... Memphis shot 51% and Pop hated it. People are acting like the Spurs D all of a sudden was awesome last night... it still sucked.
Tony has struggled hard this year with injuries, but he looked like he was starting to turn the corner before the ankle problem. Hopefully he recovers quickly because the Spurs don't really see Hill's future as a starting point guard. They see him as a small shooting guard (which is what he is). If Parker were out for significant time, the Spurs would probably trade someone for a PG.
:tuQuote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
It would have to be someone elite like Tony.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
A trade for Parker and Bosh works not that Toronto would ever do this much less the Spurs.
Again...I love Tony Parker...What he's done for the Spurs...Matter of fact...I was one of the few who at the beginning thought Parker would become an elite top 5 PG when most others thought he was a wasted draft pick.
But I see this Spurs team in need of a different identity than it had just 3 years ago.
What's ironic is Tony...for all his greatness...was instrumental in significantly helping the Spurs win a championship only once since he's been here and elevated his game to that level. That was in '07.
Since...even though he's been tops at his position...the Spurs haven't been able to win it again without a dependable big not named Duncan.
After Avery and before Parker I would say the team did not have a "good" PG but had excellent post players. Now the team has a great PG, good to really good 2's/Wings but no one to step in for or play alongside an aging Duncan. When/If Duncan is out...this team would not win.
If it were to have another elite big...This team IMO can win it all without Parker because of the talent it possesses in the guard department. It could not win it all if Duncan were to go down.
I know it's funny. But maybe some fans really do care about the players dunking. I actually don't care about it. But knowing Spurs' fans, sometimes you know how funny they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bukefal
I don't understand why some fans are comparing TP with Hill. We should be happy the Spurs have both of them in their team. TP is a proven PG who has won three championships with the team. I know some people will claim it because of TD. But if we look at it in the other way, can we say that TD has won the last three championships because TP has been part of the team to help him? And also the help from Manu. I love all big three. I love Hill too. Anyone named Spurs is always supported by me.
I have nothing against Hill but does everyone think Hill will still show this kind of performance once other teams start playing tougher defense on him? Once he becomes one of the stars in the team.
I have nothing against Hill but does everyone think Hill will still show this kind of performance once other teams start playing tougher defense on him? Once he becomes one of the stars in the team.[/quote]
:toast
I don't think this thread was started to bash Tony, and we will only go as far as a healthy TP will take us ( like Manu and TD). I haven't heard anyone say that we would be better without him in the line up. I think what some of us are saying is that he could do more given his health if he played a different role on the team this year.
Parker's greatest contribution to the team is his scoring. Now because of injury, fatigue, RJ, or whatever, Tony hasn't been Tony of 08-09. He is not particularly adept at finding teammates ala Kidd, CP, or DeronW. He never has. He is an average defender at best and that's why Pop always had Bowen on guys like Nash, Billups, and CP3. Now Hill and Bogans have that job. He is not a great rebounder for a pg, and he doesn't have the basketball IQ ( a term people around here like to kickaround a lot) of a great set up man either.
So, therefore, you surround Parker with shooters to help him space the floor and watch him run a lay up drill against 2nd string guards. He would be a great 6th man for the Spurs this year. And, yes, I'll agree that TP is and can be an all-star level player but only when he is healthy enough to do what he does best...get to the paint and score at will. This year he's been able to do that on some nights but has lacked the consistency that has made him great in the past.
One last thing, I don't understand why people get so offended if Parker came in off the bench. It's not like he would be getting the Bowen treatment. A lot of Spurs starters have been benched if Pop felt like they could contribute better in some way ( Manu, Finely, Bowen,...hell even Duncan). Besides isn't it more important who ends the game than who starts it?
I love Tony. He's amazing.
But he's going to be garbage when he loses some of his speed. I hope that doesn't happen for a long time.
that's, IMO, the most relevant point of this threadQuote:
Originally Posted by doobs
Does TP have what it takes to turn into a good 3 pts shooter when he is in his 30s?
Now this is a sentiment that has some merit. TP should take a look at what's happening now and realize he's not always going to be the fastest player n the league, and so if he wants to be effective in the league past the age of 30, he need to develop more skills that aren't based on the assumption that he can use brute speed to beat his defender off the dribble.Quote:
Originally Posted by doobs
In a few years it's not going to be plantar fasciitis but older legs slowing him down, and he and Pop need to start on contingency plans.
Parker's ego hasn't ever really been a problem. I think Pop set the foundation that effectively prevented that from ever being the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
As for TP letting others run the offense, I think Parker is well situated to do that because his offensive skill set is so potent. Maybe setup was a poor choice of words on my part, how about "get the offense flowing" instead. I don't think anyone can argue that it flows much better without TP. Last year, the offense did not flow at all, it became a one-trick pony.
How much better do Dice, Blair and Jefferson play with TP on the bench? Ball movement, guys moving without the ball, easy buckets, they all pick up with TP out because guys know Manu will reward them.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Because Parker was the only one involved:toastQuote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Hard to disagree, because TP is a points machine on the break/in the lane. But with the talent we need to integrate, TP's one-man game can be seen as a liability...his shortcomings become obvious in light of Manu's playmaking and even George Hill's ability to run the team effectively while maintaining a flowing diversified attack.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
When TP has the pedal to the metal on the offensive end, he is gassed late in the game. And I'm not saying he isn't running the offense correctly...he run's what Pop wants I'm sure. But it takes a big toll on his legs. Stops are harder and harder in the 3rd and 4th. How many times does TP come up with a key steal/deflection/defense late in the game? Compared to Hill? And that is not just this year...Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
With better movement and a diverse attack on the offensive end, relying less on TP to be a one-man game, making use of other guys' talent, that would reduce TP's load and assumably he would be better rested to dig in late on defense. Nothing weird about that logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Actually, it's my hypothesis only, not really any need to argue before we get a larger sample size. That is why I said..."The key here is looking at the consistency in Spurs play over four quarters while Tony is out..." and TP hasn't been out long at all. By looking I mean over the next several games. And I admit I could be wrong. But I might not be.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
I never said we would be better off without Parker. I do think he is a hugely efficient scorer. Like AI but better. I just happen to think our glaring need is someone to facilitate our offense, get guys involved, keep us from becoming a 2 pronged attack.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Make use of the role players. Just what the Spurs have been known for over the years.
The analysis is not that simple. Parker played a role on those teams...with much different personell. We didn't need him to play anything other than team D on one end, and on the other he played pick and roll and drive to the hole.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Now we have guys in Dice and RJ and Blair that can get easy buckets but need the setup. And now if Parker tries to run the offense as we used to, we are neglecting our potential. And now if Parker takes plays off, TD is not automatically going to cover it up with a block, nor Horry with the help and the hard foul, nor is Bowen going to be there for the tough assignments.
Which is why our team tends to flow on offense when he is in:toastQuote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Gotta love being versatile to what the other team gives you:toast Rather than running it down their throats hell or high water.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
We have tens of millions in payroll just waiting to blow up in the stats column. Hill sounds like just what we need!Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
No need to get rid of him:toastQuote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Except that Parker can't run the break, can't set up players at the rim, and has never been able to feed Duncan over the top of the defense.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Maybe that explains our over-reliance on the three point shot and the inconsistency in our offense, and the inability for guys like RJ, Dice and Blair to find their game with Parker on the floor.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
True.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
What does court vision help if you are feeding guys late and we are constantly having to reset on fast breaks if Parker doesn't take the shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
It's more than RJ. Blair scores around the rim and moves without the ball...Dice can play much better. Say what you like that is the role of the PG.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Not if we can do better.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
In my best Archie Bunker..."Those were the dayssss..." :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Again TP with the stop/steal/deflection in crunchtime doesn't ring many bells.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
As for Hill, his defense is the most overrated aspect of his game. He can be a good defender and sometimes is a good defender ... but he can also be exploited at times. [/quote]
He will continue to grow. But his consistent pressure is the reason Pop and I love him.
I didn't want to start a thread for that but just to put things into perspective regarding the number of assists that is for me a quite overated stat. Assists are linked to the ability of the PG of course but also it is a ratio very linked to a team and the way you run the Offense.
Look at Collison stat when he is starting, last two games he dished 32 assists !! I've seen him he is no CP3 he is good but not that good. So if he can put this kind of number I suppose TP assists will increase too in this kind of team.
Don't get me wrong, CP3 is a great player and the best PG in the league but the difference between him and a guy like TP is thinner than most people believe. CP3 is also a product of a system, put him in the spurs system and his stats will be lower than today.
To sum up TP is fitting very well in the spurs system, talks about trading him are mostly stupid.
When was Parker going to start shooting 3's again? I thought those days began in the 2007 finals and he just hasn't shot them still.
I think he is keeping that for the Pos like a secret weapon CIA tpQuote:
Originally Posted by z0sa
That's what's been happening for one and a half seasons...Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp