Reply With Quote
Good to see someone looks at stats and does some research.
From Game 7 play-by-play:
7:11 61-64 Tony Parker enters the game for Manu Ginobili.
And I'll always remember Pop's explosion when Parker fouled Hamilton to give him an and-1 in the last 10 seconds of that game. Pretty tough to sit out the last 7 minutes when: (a) you were subbed into the game at the 7:11 mark and never left; and (b) when an indelible moment for some is the dumb foul you committed during the last 7 minutes.
Good to see someone looks at stats and does some research.
well in 2003 he was the 2nd best player on the team.
I think right now Manu > TP also. Even though Parker has a Finals MVP, Manu has carried this team in tougher series, like the 2005 Finals.
TP has been unbelievable, and by the time hes done he could have a couple more Finals MVP's.... but right now Manu has been a bigger contributor for me.
The Spurs won les, didn't they?
In '03, Parker averaged 14.7 ppg but was great in Games 3 (29 points on 13-23 from the field) and 4 (25 points) of the WCF in Dallas to help the Spurs rally from their Game 1 loss. He was also quietly spectacular in the Spurs' put away game in LA that year (27 points, 5 assists). And while his detractors remember his struggles in Games 4 and 6 of the '03 Finals, they conveniently forget that in the other 4 games of that series, he averaged 19.3 ppg and shot about 45% from the field.
thank you very much!!!!!
Neither Moore nor Johnson ever made an All-Star team, for whatever that's worth.
Remember Hoopsworld doesn't know .
Yeah, I'll trust the fact that the Western Conference coaches have voted Parker an All-Star for the 3rd time in 4 years.
the post i was answering was talking about the most important spur. no the best player. Gervin was a better overall player maybe, but tony with his three les has to be more important for the spurs history.
And for manu, i would say he's tied at third in the most important spur. Manu was already a great player when he joined the spurs whereas Tony growed with them. but he has a finals MVP and two more ASG than manu.
so, most important spurs would be: Tim (best talent and best achievements), David (2nd best talent, great achievments), Tony 3a and manu 3b (same core, same talent, same team achievements, more individuals recognition for tony) and gervin (great talent, maybe 2nd or 3rd more talented spurs but weak in achievements).
Maybe?
Gervin might have been weak in team achievements but he also didn't get to play with Duncan or Robinson. But personal achievements, it's no contest.
And as for as importance, if Gervin didn't carry the team in their primitive years, the team wouldn't even exist today.
I agree Manu and Parker are pretty much locked together. But you cant deny what Gervin has done. Parker has more rings and Finals MVP's than Robinson, but you have to factor in the teams the players played with throughout their careers and therefore their individual accolades and ability.
Not taking anything away from Parker, but you put Gervin with Duncan and i have no doubt in my mind he would end up with 2 or 3 rings. Thats just the way the dice rolls. I think Gervin is number 3.
TP and Manu 4a and 4b.
Gervin will always be the face of an ERA for the spurs...
But Tony, Manu and Bruce will be the faces of our glory days that we will remember for the rest of our lives... and remember more fondly...
They are only going to get better as we get older and more time has passed...
... Boston thinks Bill Russell cut Jesus' umbilical cord...
yeah that is why coaches get fired
tp haters
I thought Parker didn't play the last minutes of that game (I'm not counting where he got in for a specific defensive or ofensive play, I do remember that stupid foul on Hamilton) but if this wasn't the case I'm sorry, either way the fact remains that he didn't play very well that series and that game in particular. Here's an analysis of that game. I'm quoting what it says at the 4:08 mark: "They were able to win this game (the Spurs) with only four players playing well, give Popovich a lot of credit, for getting Mohamed and Parker out of there and Horry and Barry in."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5Tv1mlM8fA
^ you are thinking of game 6, 2003.
Well parker is young enough, you'll never know what he might accomplish in the future.
I think he's on his way to HOF http://www.friendster.com/photos/60364802/1/770803946#
Did you just try to use Bill Walton as a legitimate source?
It's not so amazing that Parker has now developed into this elite-level PG. His ability to finish at the rim does hark back to Rod Strickland.
It's funny how it was just five years ago, the Spurs we "sack-chasin'" J-Kidd, who couldn't shoot as well as Parker even back then. I never understood that fascination.
lol his finals mvp is horse ....daniel gibson a fkn rookie pg was the cavs starting PG for godsakes....anyone playin opposit gibson wouldve torched him and won the finals mvp....
maybe cause ppl were still pissed about the parkers disappearing act against the fakers every time we collide in the playoffs....
Still he was the best player in the Finals. Personally i think the Finals MVP should be changed to Playoffs MVP - obviously going to a player from the Championship team. Often the harder series, especially the last decade in the West, have been before the Finals.
Well he played in the NBA (and at a pretty high level) for many years, he might know a thing or two.Did you just try to use Bill Walton as a legitimate source?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
