Reply With Quote
lol I have a picture of tp so I'm a homer ? check my posts. I said parker hater as you stated for me parker homer. I don't know if you hate or not and I don't care.
You're not a Parker homer, yet you have a picture of Parker? And yet in the same post you label me as a Parker hater because I don't agree with you? Yes, you make a convincing argument.
It seems your problem with a Arenas/Iverson comparison is their fg% is lower, yet I don't hear you make an argument that their games are fundamentally different in approach. Right now Parker's fg % is low so I guess then you do agree?
These Parker threads are hilarious because they're always a few Parker fans on 24 hour security watch trying to minimize any real discussion. I don't hate Parker. I'm a fan of the team. With all the new talent, players will need to adapt. I haven't seen Parker adapt yet either to accomodate the new players or to change his approach when his shot isn't falling. I don't feel that makes me a Parker hater but perhaps you've become sensitive having to battle with the maniacal Manu fanbase. Whatever, you don't seem interested in discussion so I'll move on.
lol I have a picture of tp so I'm a homer ? check my posts. I said parker hater as you stated for me parker homer. I don't know if you hate or not and I don't care.
the "manu church" has nothing to do with the Parker hate lately, and for quite a while.
Manu has had more than his share of BS and unfair criticism lately on this forum. i think that made the manu fans more aware of how much the blind bashing is annoying and boring, whoever the player victim of that is.
Firstly, why don't we stop saying "Parker Hate" because a very high percentage of posters here don't hate Parker. The argument is more about trying to get the new guys involved, specifically Richard Jefferson. Is it not true that RJ played better when Parker was injured? It is true.
That, however, does not mean that anyone is asking for Parker to come off the bench (although some morons have said he should be traded, as if RJ is more important than Parker). It merely means that it's noticeable.
We haven't had a Jefferson-like player in many years, so to neglect his talents does a disservice to the rest of the team. Yes, we'll still win, the Spurs won 54 games last year with Tony doing what he does, but all of us were excited about the offseason acquisition of RJ and what he'd bring. So far that has really only surfaced during the games Tony was out. It's not a bash on Tony more than just a recognition of the TEAM's deficiencies.
I put this on Coach Pop more than Tony. Tony is playing the best way he knows how with the team he's had for the last couple of years. It's a new team now, though, and they will eventually gel, but it's going to take adjustments from every player at all positions. Tony is not exempt from that.
Okay...I called you a Parker fan, you called yourself a Parker fan...somehow that meant I was a Parker hater. Because he's one of the more talented players on the team I think it's fair to spend more time discussing him. That's all this is.
I'm all for discussing him fairly.
Point guards are always under the most scrutiny from a fan base. They have (along with centers) the toughest job on the team. You read other team's forums and you'll find the same thing out of their fans regarding their point guards. The point guard is the first player blamed and the last to receive credit. The last point guard who was universally loved by their fans might have been Magic Johnson.
Is it fair? Maybe not but sometimes it goes overboard with parker (like last year when he had 36 pts and 10 asts against orlando and people were blaming him for the loss even if he was the only player who show up)
Spurs are better with Parker, no question. He kills a lot of teams and his aggressive drives open up shots for others. As long as Tony gives it up when he doesn't have a shot, the Spurs thrive. Over-dribbling is his only real weakness and that comes and goes. He's still learning how to set teams up, particularly on the break, but he's the Spurs' primary scoring threat right now. The Spurs are obviously better WITH Parker.
^ Agree.
But there are a lot of Parker fans who seem to put him above the Spurs. They get over sensitive to any criticism and think he can do no wrong. Parker does far more good than bad, but it is ok to critique his game.
There is a problem with Parker hate, but that is a very small percentage of posters. But the defensive nature of some posters with regards to TP is getting crazy.
If you let Parker run pick n rolls all night, and spread the floor with bonner/Mason Jr./Finley and maybe Dice he can rack up 10-12 assist if the other team is insistent on collapsing in the paint so he cant score. He'll give up the ball if doubled, and can rack up assist easily that way. However, He doesnt have PG awareness. If your a guy who moves without the ball, most likely he wont be looking for. If your a guy who is solid in the post he will not run an isolation play for you. If you have a mismatch and he has a mismatch, he is going to try to score; instead of looking for you. Parker has always been that way. The reason he its being highlighted more this year is becuause of RJ. RJ is maybe the most versatile spur on the roster. He can shoot the spot up 3, but also slash/post/and finish at the rim in transition and otherwise. With Parker on the floor he is relegated to a spot up shooter. If TP is to look for him in the post, he needs to be ready to take that 16ft jumper cause of RJs double team. It can be done, however at this stage in his career RJ may not be able to adjust that well to a shootfirst PG which is why I like Hill/RJ playing together. Parker has always been a score-first PG and I doubt he'll change, since in the past that has really screwed up his game, thats why I like Parker and a shooter at the 2 or 3 spot. So basically theyll have to feel eachother out and play to their strengths. The team is better with Parker. PERIOD
Give him time to get used to RJ. TP is used to running in a slower system with a ton of play calls. He has not had a lot of guys who break out like RJ. The entire team is adjusting and that is especially tough on Tim and TP.
They will adjust and try and make it work. Now, it may never happen, but it won't be because TP is not good enough. It will be for multiple reasons.
This.
We're obviously better WITH Parker. I don't think there's debating this.
I also think we all saw him play considerably better than he has this season overall, and wish for him to get back to that level. Nothing more, nothing less.
the tonite game is another proof that tp is a ballhog like Iverson, I mean in 33 min he took an impressive 10 shoots converting 6 while dishing 7 assists, typically Iverson or Arenas way of playing.
tp had 9 shot attempts 8 assist
16 points
mike finley even had more shot attempts then tp tonight
he knows how to pass
idiots
Tonight was an aberration for Tony, obviously. I think we're all arguing the same points here and I don't understand the fervor of the debate.
My whole thing was that he has to make small adjustments to get RJ more involved.
rj scored 5 points and tp had 3 assist before attempting a shot!
yeah i know i was messing around a little, still never iverson could spend 33 min taking only 9 or 10 shots
Clearly, he's following this thread VERY closely and decided to address his critics.
As to your point, I compared Parker to those players because they all are shoot first point guards. I raised the point that one can dominate the ball and average a high number of assists as Iverson did, yet it still doesn't mean they are good passers. You seem proud of Parker's assists yet dismissive of other shoot first point guards who often average more assists while dominating the ball even more, which was my original point: assists numbers alone don't tell the whole story.
Anyway, comparing Parker to those two can only go so far because they played in different scenarios, often with poor coaching, and most importantly - they didn't play next to the best player of recent memory, Tim Duncan. I see no reason why Arenas couldn't have played well in the Spurs system next to Tim and Manu as he was an excellent scorer and shooter. In fact, Tony often compared himself to Arenas, especially when he was lobbying for his big contract and wanted to get paid a few million more than Arenas.
It was a good win tonight and great to see the whole team contribute.
If Iverson only took 10 shots in a game his head would have exploded.
I disagree but I understand your point. It's all good.
I still think that you underestimate TP passing ability, put tony on a D'antony team he will average 3 to 4 more assists a game but he is no steve nash we all agree with that.
Lastly your arenas / iverson comparaison is reasonably unfair.
Point is obviously tp is trying to adapt, I think pop asks him to be more ball distributor early in the game to have the whole group involved. I recognized tonite the TP in the French NT being quiet trying to distribute, personnally I'm not a big fan I prefer see him being aggressive but I'm ok with that if the team is better.
We all see each others points of views. This is good. The spurs won as a team and Tony contributed to that, which is even better.
The difference between those PGs and Parker is that Parker scores, a lot, and at a VERY high rate. He gets to the rim. He makes layups. Regardless of what you think about his passing abilities, Parker making a relatively uncontested layup is better than ANY shot he's going to get for ANY player outside of a dunk. If Parker gets to the rack with no defender in position, you WANT him taking a lot of shots, because it's by far the best look you are likely to get in the 24 seconds you have.
Meanwhile AI, Arenas, and other PGs that "dominate the ball" (which is humorous, it's called the point guard for a reason) CANNOT be compared to Tony because they don't score with nearly the efficiency that he does. Over the course of a single season, an 8% difference (0's career to Tony's) equates out to about 160 points, or 120 shot attempts fewer. This balloons to well over 200 points and 140+ shots if you match Tony's career scoring % vs. Iverson's. Say whatever you want about Tony, 160 points over a season could very well be the difference between being 25 games over .500 and a .500 record. So no, I don't agree with the similarities between Arenas/Iverson vs. Tony. Would equating Antoine Walker to Ray Allen or Reggie Miller (using the idea that they both shoot a lot of 3 pointers) be a fair comparison? You can't just suddenly disregard such a huge statistical difference because it's an inconvenient stat that doesn't fit the idea that you're attempting to convey.
This is of course, to say nothing at all as to the effect Tony has on the defense, who has to scheme for him as much and probably more now than they do for Duncan. Parker's relentless drives to the hoop open the floor up for other teammates.
---
Yes. I realize that he has bad games. I'm curious as to what Spurs player doesn't? What is infuriating is that pseudo-Spurs fans on this board commenting en masse about how we need to "Trade Tony" or that he needs to completely change his game to be acceptable as a point within the Spurs offense. This kind of ignorance is galling, because it reeks of elitism, and Spurs fans who aren't happy unless Duncan or Manu gets the ball in every single possession.
Parker is our engine. Everyone in the Spurs organization seems to recognize this. He consistently gives us our best scoring option in every game. Pop knows it, Duncan will freely say it, a lot of fans seem to know it.... but a very noticeable number of individuals on this site seem to think Parker is just not a "true" point guard, so they take every possible opportunity to rip on him. These seem to frequently coincide with individuals who only care about stats, rather than actually looking at how an individual performs. If Tony was averaging 10 and 10, for some reason I feel like those same individuals would be applauding how "selfless" of a star he's become. But actually, I wonder if Tony could ever have those Spurs "fans" cheering him on, instead of resenting him for becoming the primary offense, supplanting the beloved Duncan.
Last edited by Cry Havoc; 11-30-2009 at 12:35 AM.
TP is CLEARLY listening to the haters here and adjusting his game accordingly...
Riddle: What goes "dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble-dribble, dribble, cross-over dribble, reverse dribble, dribble-dribble, spin swoosh, splash!"?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Answer: Matt Bonner bailing out Tony Parker again with a another three as the shot-clock expires. Assist goes to Parker.
This should be starting a thread!!!!
I hope there will be as many fans as possible, who don't give Tony the credits he deserves, that read this.
It's not the question of being a TP homer or hater, it's about UNDERSTANDING what he brings to the team...
I guess there will always be players whom we "blindly" see their qualities or defaults, I feel sorry for Tony that he belongs to the 2nd category...
By the way, thanks for taking the time, it was clear" and wised!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
