Harvey: All-decade steal? It's not Parker

[duncan228]

All-decade steal? It's not Parker
By Buck Harvey

SI.com could have gone with either Kobe or Shaq when it named its player of the decade. Instead, the online site opted for Tim Duncan because, for among other reasons, he was "an active defender who chased pick-and-rolls out to the three-point line and yet hustled back to protect the rim and control the boards."

And they say the media is blinded by flash.

SI.com made some other nuanced choices when it named all-decade NBA winners and losers, and the Spurs were recepients again. For example, listing R.C. Buford as the best general manager, along with Gregg Popovich, goes against the norm. Buford is often ignored because of Popovich's franchise control. What they have done together has often been ignored, too. Not once in this decade were they named the NBA's executives of the year.

Still, SI.com missed when it named Tony Parker the biggest draft steal of the decade.

Parker was a great find, of course, and drafting him changed the franchise. Getting him at No. 28 was remarkable, too. All-Stars rarely come so late in the first round.

But scouts knew who Parker was. The Celtics nearly drafted him, and the Magic had considered it, and the Spurs sweated through every selection until he dropped to them. As it was with DeJuan Blair this past summer, the Spurs were lucky others missed what was in front of them.

Parker wasn't the only mistake in the 2001 draft, either. Kwame Brown went first overall, and Gilbert Arenas was drafted two slots after Parker was.

What happened in the 1999 draft was something else. Then, at the end of the second round, with the 57th selection, with the second to last pick of the entire draft, the Spurs found Manu Ginobili.

Upon announcing this choice, the Spurs misspelled Ginobili's name. The Associated Press later added a third spelling.

Years later, Buford said they had guessed. Still, they guessed on the right guy because they had done their homework, and because they were able to look past an unconventional background. Furthermore, they were among the first with a long-term strategy. Why not let these kinds of prospects play in Europe and see what happens?

All of which is another reason SI.com was right about the Buford/Popovich combination. To help the player of the decade, they found the top two steals of the decade.

__________


One more disagreement, albeit a minor one: For its signature play of the decade, SI.com named a Robert Horry 3-pointer that beat Sacramento in Game 4 of the 2002 Western Conference Finals. It was dramatic, certainly, and it's a shot that has come to define Horry for usually being in the right place at the right time.

But was it more dramatic -- or bigger -- than Horry's final 3-pointer against the Pistons in the 2005 Finals?

*********************

The SI.com piece.

http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/p...ng-decade-best

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...63#post3929663

[ffadicted]

What happened in the 1999 draft was something else

I think he answered his own doubts there

[FromWayDowntown]

San Antonio, Texas must be the only place on the planet where a decade is 11 years long. . . .

[EricB]

Well ginobili came onto the scene in 2002 so maybe that's how they justify it...

[Pero]

San Antonio, Texas must be the only place on the planet where a decade is 11 years long. . . .

2009-1999=10

One more disagreement, albeit a minor one: For its signature play of the decade, SI.com named a Robert Horry 3-pointer that beat Sacramento in Game 4 of the 2002 Western Conference Finals. It was dramatic, certainly, and it's a shot that has come to define Horry for usually being in the right place at the right time.

So he's defined by a 3-pointer that only came to be because of dumb refs? Cool.

[vander]

I wanted us to take Arenas, and I still think he would have turned out to be a slightly better pick,

TP is like the Marion Barber of the NBA, made great by their reckless abandon and fearless careening through traffic, but once he isn't charging crazily at the hoop for sick layups anymore, the rest of his game just isn't that impressive.

[Dex]

2009-1999=10



So he's defined by a 3-pointer that only came to be because of dumb refs? Cool.

2000 says o.

[Pero]

2000 says o.

1-10 say o too.

[alchemist]

2000 says o.

2009 - 2000 = 9

[Dex]

Ginobili was selected in 1999. If you're counting the year he was selected as part of the "decade", then that counts as 1.

1999 - 1
2000 - 2
2001 - 3
2002 - 4
2003 - 5
2004 - 6
2005 - 7
2006 - 8
2007 - 9
2008 - 10
2009 - 11

Now I'm not math-a-magician or anything, but that looks like 11 years to me. And since a decade is only 10 years, they need to settle on either 2000-2009, or 1999-2008 and put this article out a year ago.

[Pero]

Ginobili was selected in 1999. If you're counting the year he was selected as part of the "decade", then that counts as 1.

1999 - 1
2000 - 2
2001 - 3
2002 - 4
2003 - 5
2004 - 6
2005 - 7
2006 - 8
2007 - 9
2008 - 10
2009 - 11

Now I'm not math-a-magician or anything, but that looks like 11 years to me. And since a decade is only 10 years, they need to settle on either 2000-2009, or 1999-2008 and put this article out a year ago.

I wasn't reffering to this... But since you mention it... 99-00=1, 00-01=2, 01-02=3, 02-03=4, 03-04=5, 04-05=6, 05-06=7, 06-07=8, 07-08=9, 08-09=10. And there you have it.

[Dex]

If we were pre-draft, I'd be inclined to agree with you. But I'm still saying that you can't fit 11 drafts into 10 years.

But at this point, I'm pretty sure we're arguing over potatoes and po-tah-toes.

[quentin_compson]

But at this point, I'm pretty sure we're arguing over potatoes and po-tah-toes.

Sorry, but I couldn't resist:

[Pero]

If we were pre-draft, I'd be inclined to agree with you. But I'm still saying that you can't fit 11 drafts into 10 years.

But at this point, I'm pretty sure we're arguing over potatoes and po-tah-toes.

[deadratsam]

I wasn't reffering to this... But since you mention it... 99-00=1, 00-01=2, 01-02=3, 02-03=4, 03-04=5, 04-05=6, 05-06=7, 06-07=8, 07-08=9, 08-09=10. And there you have it.

99-00 is the year that ends right after 11:59:59 on December 31, 1999

08-09 is the year that ends right after 11:59:59 on December 31, 2008 that was almost a year ago.

[lefty]

Parker is the all-decade turnover

[FeZZy]

I hate Gilbert Arenas as much as the next guy bit I think he is way better than Parker at least a more complete "offensive" package then drives and midrange jumpers..

[Solid D]

Speaking of decades, what about the people who hold to the notion that the first decade of the 21st century started on Jan. 1, 2001? Therefore, the first decade officially ends Dec. 31, 2010.

[ffadicted]

I can't believe there's actually doubt that the decade lasts from 00-09 lol

[024]

this argument just proves how arbitrary decades are in the nba. so everything should just stop counting now that it's 2009? re ed way of measuring the best teams/players considering many teams and players still have a few years left to buff up their resumes.

[Horse]

I hate Gilbert Arenas as much as the next guy bit I think he is way better than Parker at least a more complete "offensive" package then drives and midrange jumpers..

Yeah a selfish prick who does'nt pass, rebound, or play D and is always hurt. That's way better than Parker.

[Nathan Explosion]

Speaking of decades, what about the people who hold to the notion that the first decade of the 21st century started on Jan. 1, 2001? Therefore, the first decade officially ends Dec. 31, 2010.

They'd be right because there is no such thing as Year Zero. Year 1-100 is the first century, 101-200 the 2nd and so on and so forth.

It's not rocket science trying to figure that one out.

And Gino was drafted in the last decade, hence why he can't be the steal of this decade. The Spurs 99 le is discounted so should the draft. Again, not rocket science Harvey.

[romain.star]

Yeah a selfish prick who does'nt pass, rebound, or play D and is always hurt.

Spurs fans talking about parker...