Reply With Quote
it's ok.
This is the height of ignorance, and this kind of ridiculous opinion is exactly why I started this thread.
the idiots point themselves out by just thinking aloud
so you're saying that people who can be efficient as a kobe or a healthy t-mac are easy to find?
sigh. . .
it's ok.
This is the height of ignorance, and this kind of ridiculous opinion is exactly why I started this thread.
the idiots point themselves out by just thinking aloud
That's your problem. Ginobili has also played without Tim and Tony too and scored upwards of 30 points and we've beaten teams over .500 in the process. Players normally step up their games when one of the pieces is missing. Opponents normally relax when a piece is missing. Can you expect that night in and night out over 82 game season? You simply cannot. For further reference look at the Dallas series.
Last edited by ElNono; 12-01-2009 at 05:46 PM.
I'll be around when Manu/Tim/Pop retire and Tony is the only one left. I will also going to have my expectations lowered several notches. Championship is going to be most likely out of the question. Tony, IMO, is an All Star caliber player. Which is no small accomplishment. However, he just isn't franchise/superstar caliber. Again, my opinion only, and I love Tony. But the reality is that there's already at least two other PGs in the league right now that are already better than Tony.
Well, if Tony ends up going to another team to play number 2 or 3 behind some other stars, then it will be confirmation of my point above. I'm fairly sure he'll at least give it a shot at being the man. Eventually, everybody just wants to win.
Cry Havoc acts like this thread is about a real objective discussion, yet look at its glorious roots with the first post. Of course you're going to keep posting in this thread. You want to focus on the greatness of Parker. Yeah, we get it.
Cry Havoc runs from any discussion of a critique of Parker, such as his passing or assists but loves to talk about fg percentages and has now created a paradigm for a great point guard: 20ppg, 50% fg, and 6 assists. Hey, those are Tony's numbers!
For the millionth time, the Arenas/Iverson references were to make clear that high assist numbers don't by themselves mean someone is a good passer, yet somehow Cry Havoc takes this to mean that Tony is being thrown into the gutter along with the likes of those "awful" players Iverson and Arenas, even though they averaged more assists than Parker with much less talent around them for a good portion of their careers. I think it's clear: assist numbers don't tell the whole story. Brent Barry hardly averaged any assists on the Spurs but no one can say he was a bad passer. All you've proven is that Tony shoots at a high percentage, and we don't need your thread to already know what is obvious to everyone.
I agree, but we should also consider that PGs you can build a team around are very rare. It is just a lot easier to have a big man as your franchise player than a PG.
That being said, there aren't a lot of players I'd rather have than Tony right now. Paul and Williams would definitely work great here, Billups as well, but that's about it.
I think we all agree with your point even homers know that. BTW even the 2 or 3 or 4 whatever superior PGs are not capable either. Basically since several years now : no dominant big means no LOB see DW, Nash, Kidd, CP3...
For sure we can argue that CP3 is a franchise/superstar caliber and TP is not but at the end of the day the result is the same, no dominant big = no lob.
At the end of the day too tp is the good fit for the spurs and vice and versa.
Is it the end of the day, yet?
mlaaaa....
at the end of the day my english is in great shape to achieve low level recordIs it the end of the day, yet?
point is at the end of the day no big no lob no women no cries
Who are the franchise/superstar calibre players? Probably only a handful. Lebron, Kobe, Tim, Shaq. I won't even go so far to quote CP3 cos he is not. He won't win a ring without a strong big man backing him up. Do you think Spurs will win another ring if we were to trade for CP3, whom I think should be better than TP. Doubtful. The fact of the matter is that not every good PG can play in the Spurs system. At at this current moment, TP is probably the best PG in NBA who can excel the most in the Spurs system. And remember that, as your logic goes, we won't win another ring without Tim and Manu. That window is closing fast. I'll bet Tim won't stay longer than 3 years if we can't win it this year.
Does it matter if your point is confirmed? Kobe, being a mega superstar himself, won't win without his ensemble cast right now. Come on, Lebron hasn't even won a ring yet. So does it really matter if Tony is not the superstar/calibre player. He at least has 3 rings at his age.
Tony's difficult to judge..
There has only been ONE player that played PG that had a higher usage % than Tony did last year, and it was Allen Iverson..Iverson did it numerous times during his career, and he put up similar assists numbers to Tony in many of those years..
Parker is a lot more comparable to combo guards, as opposed to PGs..his style is obviously suited to be a combo guard, but he's stuck in a PGs body..it's tough to compare him to guys like Steve Francis or even Iverson, because he's a lot more efficient than guys like that..
He can't be compared to guys like Paul and Williams, because he plays a different style..he's nowhere near those guys when it comes to passing, but he's arguably better than both when it comes to scoring..
He's probably one of the tougher guys to judge in the NBA, even though we get to see him play in every game..a more efficient, less athletic, less of a headcase version of Steve Francis is a decent comparison IMO..
he has to play like a legit star most nights though..currently this year, Parker has outplayed his opponent 5 times, and was outplayed 4 times..the Spurs are 5-0 when Parker outplays his opponent, not a coincidence..hopefully he can look like he did last year, where he looked like a dominant scoring PG..
good post. I agree he is quite unique even if I see what you mean comparing him with Francis. What is really surprising with TP is the fact that he can do the same action finishing with an easy lay up over and over during a game or even a serie. Everybody knows exactly what he is going to do but nobody can stop him, see for instance the 2007 finals.
Ya he is definitely unique..he's also the by far the best little man I've ever seen at finishing at the rim without dunking..one of the best I've seen in general at finishing at the rim without dunking..
Completely agree. Even if the rules has been shifting to give guards an advantage, you cannot get around the fact you still need big man(s).
And while there's a bunch of guards that would work great with us, I still think TP is the best option for us. He has been part of this core and already knows pretty much everything there's to know about how we play. He plays hard every night. I'm glad we have him.
I actually agree with almost everything you posted here.
Well, that's something we touched upon in an earlier post. You do need your big man(s). Now, if you switched Kobe for Tony, you think the Lakers win it all? Honestly, I don't think they do. Now, I'd love to be wrong and eat crow and Tony to be the franchise player that takes over Duncan and leads us to more les. Today, I don't see it. Just my opinion.
Hey Parker and better rhyme
Your point was that Parker is an efficient scorer because Tim is there.
My point is that when Tim is out, Parker is still an efficient scorer. When he plays with the French NT, he is still an efficient scorer and that in this Dallas series he was an incredible scorer.
Tony scores around 50% FG regardless of the context. Iverson doesn't.
Parker is not a perfect PG. As you stated he is not Nash when it comes to passing. But is high% scoring as nothing to do with Tim (the same goes with Manu. He doesn't need Tim when he is playing for Argentina).
The things Duncan bring to Parker are rings and maybe multiple All Star selections. But his stats would probably have been better playing for another team.
If this is your criterion Kobe is not a franchise player and Lebron is barely one.
Tim and Shaq not anymore. Wade could be one but has won his ring with Shaq... well there is no franchise player.
My definition of a franchise player is rather different. He is just the guy you chose to build the team around. You sign him to a huge and long contract. You chose your other players to fit with him. And if your FO is good/lucky enough you can add a couple of all star to your team and become a contender.
There's really no proof of that. You pointed out to a 6 game sample as evidence, and to me that's not enough. I don't know what his numbers are in the French NT.
Sure it does. Tony is largely ineffective against teams that close out the paint. Spacing in the lane is directly provided by your bigs. There's a reason Bonner is sent camping to the perimeter. It's not just Tim that benefits from it. The reality is that whoever is guarding Tim will not slack off him. That's simply suicide. If you send the guy covering Bonner, then you expose yourself to a 3 pointer (the proverbial 'pick your poison' situation). Obviously, most good teams have figured out that you would rather have Bonner beat you than Tim/Tony. Which is really what happened with the Lakers two seasons ago, and the Mavericks last season.
As far as Manu goes, he's a different player from Tony. Manu actually has an outside game to complement his inside game. Something Tony has improved on, but is still a work in progress. There's also the fact that if you saw the Argentina NT playing you can see that they play a lot of set offense. At least they did with Magnano as the coach, when they used to be at the peak of their game. Manu is in the decline, however, while Tony is in his prime.
I think his efficiency would have suffered. He might have had better stats because he might not need to share the ball as much, but I don't think his shooting percentage would have been the same it is.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
