Reply With Quote
Not.......even........close!!!!!!
Is Manu a better player now than stackhouse at his peak , when he was the franchise player of the pistons ?
Manu's great but i don't know how he would compare to the young stack, penny's, and finley at his peak. Do you think , as a player , he is superior, or in the same class as them ?
Sometimes, i think it's easy to forget how good the spurs team and their big 3 are, but if you subs ute them with other player of an equivalent level , it shows..
Think of Kareem abdul jabbar, spreewell,and iverson of now
P.S; excuse my english
Last edited by silk; 03-24-2008 at 12:01 PM.
Not.......even........close!!!!!!
I laughed.
. No. Sir.
Errr, Or yes, wait, cofluzzed
Rofl....
Manu > Stack
and not just because of basketball skill.
So far you're tellin me that manu is so obviously better than these guys that to ask the question is kind of foolish ?
I didn't defend any answers , that manu is better or that manu is not, it was just a question to remove my ignorance.
Let me break it down...
Scoring
Manu > Stack
Rebounding...
Manu > Stack
Passing?
Manu > Stack
Human Being?
Manu > Stack
Punk Ass ?
Manu < Stack
Okay , so you don't think that at his peak, stack was a more consistent scorer , or more powerful with the rebounds , i don't know he seemed a little more athletic and stronger, but i didn't watched many of his games back then...
Obviously i think Stack is a punk ass and Manu is a baketball god, just food for thought
Stackhouse was never known for being consistent. He had his moments, but never been near an equal to Manu, sorry.
Stack in his prime was a better scorer but nothing else. Other then scoring all around he sucked in every department, passing, rebounding, defense. Essentially he was just a 1 man scoring machine on all the teams he was on.
You don't have to be sorry , once more, i just ask questions to increase my "knowledge", I'm not defending positions
Stackhouse used to be a bad ass on the court. More athletic, faster and stronger than Manu ever was.
BUT when it comes to basketball IQ, Manu 50000000000x better than Stack ever was.
manu can lead a team, Stackhouse can't even lead a group of cavemen. he is and always was as dumb as they come
How many rings has Stack??
Problem with answering this question is that we haven't seen Manu have to carry his team in the NBA as the clear cut no. 1 option all the time. I would heavily lean towards Manu if I had to answer quickly. But, thinking of it deeper, could Manu carry a team for 82 regular season games and deep into the playoffs without the help of Tim and Tony and a great coach like Pop. For all his faults, Stack led the Pistons to a 50 win season (albeit in the still very weak East) in 2001-02 being really the only good offensive option on a team whose starting line-up included Ben Wallace, Chucky Atkins, Cliff Robinson, and Michael Curry.
I truly believe Manu is the better individual talent. And, everyone saw how Manu carried his Argentine team to gold. But, I'm not completely convinced that Manu could carry an NBA team by himself. If you put Manu (in his prime) on that 2001-02 Detroit Pistons team, is that Pistons team better? Does it go farther in the playoffs?
It's a tough question to answer. As an individual talent, I'd take Manu easily. As a franchise player who has to carry a team offensively for 82 games and then have even more pressure in the playoffs to score with three non-scorers in the starting line-up, I can't really say Manu would have been much more effective than Stack was.
I doubt Manu could have done well on the Intelligence vacuum that was that Piston's team.
When they got Billups, Hamilton, and Prince their Bball IQ went up to the top of the class.
Love Sheed as a player to death... but the man needs a head on his shoulders. If he had Timmy's Bball IQ and drive... we wouldn't be having Tim-KG arguments... we would be having Sheed-Timmy arguments... and sheed might win them.
B. Wallace... forget about it...
good point but I got a better question, would Spurs have won the last 2 les if we had replaced Manu with Stackhouse? I don't think so
Maybe one of them. Probably not in 2005. Stack would do his share of damage offensively working as a third option next to Duncan and Parker. Don't know if he would have the same or even similar impact. But, the Spurs would likely still be a very good team. But, very unlikely the best team.
Also a tough question. I don't know if either question really answers which is the better player. But, I was just giving a counter point. I would take Manu over Stack (even in his prime) 10 times out of 10. But, like with most things, really depends on a bunch of different factors, including what kind of team each is on, the teammates, coaching, the style of offense, and what would be required from a mental standpoint. Manu is mentally tougher, but could his body hold up for 82 games probably playing 35 mpg as the number 1 scoring option?
Give Manu players like Fabs, Scola, Ben Wallace, and another scorer and he gets you to the playoffs in the east.
In other words, Manu could lead a bad team to about a 35-47 record or maybe worse?
Because that record would probably be enough to get into the playoffs in the east.
the coyote could lead a team to the playoffs in the east
He would get them to 40-45 wins and then be in the playoffs.
roffle le mayo
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
