Reply With Quote
Rip and Chauncey for sure.
Rip & Chauncey or Manu & Parker?
Rip and Chauncey for sure.
i guess the one more le they have justifies your assumption.
I think they are totally different players and play in completely different offensive sets, but I guess that isn't a good excuse.
I guess I'll say Manu and Parker.
Reason? Cause I said so.
Not an assumption. its my personal opinion.
I think Chauncey >>> Parker. Hes a MUCH better defender, a better shooter, a better passer, and much more clutch.
Rip and Ginobili are pretty close. Ginobili is a bit of a better playmaker, while Rip is more consistent. Both are clutch players, solid defenders, and just good all-around players. But if I was building a team and had to choose, I would take Rip. I think he is just a slightly better all-around player, and tends to make dumb mistakes and stupid turnovers less often than Ginobili (although usually he does it while trying to make something out of nothing, and ends up doing too much, thus leading to dumb mistakes).
Rip and Chauncey
Manu and Chauncey
oops, Freudian slip
I meant manu and Parker
What is this, newbie troll day?
He's only two of those things. While it's true that Billups is a better defender than Parker when he's motivated to be, that's a very rare occurrence. Most games he exerts almost no energy on the defensive end and is perfectly willing to allow his man to penetrate the defense as often as he wishes. Pop forces Parker to be more consistent on that end.
Billups is certainly a far better shooter, but then, he can't finish like Parker (Smush, much less Tony) at the rim either.
Neither of them has very good vision for a point guard, although each is capable of making the passes his position requires in their respective offenses. Parker is somewhat capable of running a fast break, even if it's only because of his own speed; Billups is patently incapable of managing an open-floor game (and it's not just because he's slow).
Billups is certainly not a choker like Parker, but all in all they're just two above-average, borderline all-star quality point guards who have become overrated because of their teams' success.
I'll take Tony because he is young and improving every year. Billups' shooting is overrated. He's shooting 43% this season and is a career 41% shooter (compare that to Tony's 50%+ seasons - and yes, I know it's because Tony scores a lot at the rim). Chauncey has been clutch, I'll give him that. Both of them aren't amazing playmakers or anything.
Manu and Rip are close. Rip is probably one of the best in the league at coming off screens. He's consistent and not wild. Manu is amazing - makes more mistakes but a playoff performer. And he's got an incredible compe ive fire. I'll take Manu.
Parker & Ginobili, but only slightly. Chauncey's toughness is something I wish Parker had more of. But Parker is quicker, and Manu can take over a game on both ends of the court in a way Hamilton can't.
i dont think its that rare..
Here are the two backcourts' season stats and totals:
Ginobili: 16.9 ppg, 4.4 reb, 3.5 ast, 1.54 stl, 24.46 PER in 27.7 min
Parker: 18.7 ppg, 3.3 reb, 5.5 ast, 1.07 stl, 20.95 PER in 33.1 min
Total: 35.6 ppg, 7.7 reb, 9.0 ast, 2.61 stl
Billups: 17.7 ppg, 3.4 reb, 7.5 ast, 1.33 stl, 21.97 PER in 37.4 min
Hamilton: 21.3 ppg, 4.0 reb, 4.1 ast, .840 stl, 19.72 PER in 37.8 min
Total: 39.0 ppg, 7.4 reb, 11.6 ast, 1.17 stl
Based purely on statistical production/game, you have to go with the Pistons combo.
Breaking it down by production per 40 minutes, however:
Ginobili: P/40:24.5, R/40:6.3, A/40:5.1
Parker: P/40:22.6, R/40:3.9, A/40:6.7
Total/40: P/40:47.1, R/40:10.2, A/40:11.8
Billups: P/40:19.0, R/40:3.6, A/40:8.0
Hamilton: P/40:22.8, R/40:3.6, A/40:3.9
Total/40: P/40:41.8, R/40:7.2, A/40:11.9
Essentially, the question is whether or not Manu and Tony could maintain their current levels of efficiency and productivity if asked to play the same amount of minutes as Hamilton and Billups. If they could, the Spurs' backcourt would be better. If they can only play their current amount of minutes however, the Spurs are the more efficient pair, but the Pistons are the more productive overall, per game. I would love to see a comparison of +/- statistics for the Spurs and Pistons for each of these four players individually, as well as in tandem. That would be another interesting piece to consider.
Furthermore, the Spurs backcourt produces more in the defensive statistic of steals, but as Bowen is evidence of, this hardly indicates defensive ability. It would also be interesting to compare manu/rip and parker/chauny defensively based on the production, over several games, of the opposing player they guarded, when they have guarded the same person. For example, what were Kidd/Nash/Terry's production when/(if?) guraded by Parker vs. Chauncy. This could give some idea (though not a perfect one because team devensive principles play a role) of relative defensive prowess.
Didn't we already answer this in 2005? And since then Tony's only gotten better.
Tony DESTROYED Chauncey for the first three quarters (the compe ive part) of their meeting this year. Having Webber instead of Big Ben makes a big difference in a negative way for Detroit. Manu and Tony can score at the rim whenever they want and they're both way efficient scorers and better defenders.
Plus all you have to do is look at the Hollinger stats..
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics
Manu 6th, Tony 25th
Billups 20th, Rip 35th
I think the 2005 Finals settled this.
I think the fact that Manu and Parker aren't playing in the fourth quarter of games here lately settles it.
kori post is dead on
as of TODAY, Manu + Tony. up until this season, Billups + Rip
Nash + Barbosa > Manu + Parker > Rip + Chauncey
Kidd and Carter
A combined 30 pts.
A combined 13 apg
And what the Spurs need most of all
A combined 14 rpg
They are better in every catagory except points and none runs a team on the floor better then Kidd.
On offense, but they will give up similar numbers on the defensive end.
As for the original question, I like one of each. I like Parker and Rip. Still, for reason's Kori stated, I'd go with San Antonio's combo. Don't think too highly of Billups. Solid player, but his defense is vastly exaggerated. He plays it at random and think he's prone to terrible shots on offense. His lone defense is his ability to hit a shot when it matters. Still, I've seen Manu destroy good teams and thus he gets the nod over Billups.
Parker >> Billups : Parker is a great scoring PG, and has the ability to pass off this ability. No longer (or seldom) forces things offensively when it's not there. Solid defense.
Many < Hamilton : A wash, but I prefer Hamilton's consistancy over Manu's explosive scoring. I think Hamilton is a better shooter and just as pasky a defender. Not the slasher one-on-one that Manu is, though.
Why? Did the two backcourts play a 2-on-2 game?
chauncey slaughters parker
manu over rip
having said that, the better combo is probably rip and chauncey
So based on Hollinger stats, you believe Dirk Nowitzki is better than Tim Duncan?
this season yes, but not career wise
Well, ok. So, right now, this season, even though Tim has had a better career, Dirk is better than Tim RIGHT NOW. Gotcha.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
