Reply With Quote
Those guys are not better than TP when all are playing their best. Not fair to judge TP when he has been battling a bad injury all year. Please present your arguments on how all of those guys are clearly better than TP.
No. Watch the games. He is struggling.
Those guys are not better than TP when all are playing their best. Not fair to judge TP when he has been battling a bad injury all year. Please present your arguments on how all of those guys are clearly better than TP.
Sorry but I think I could name 5 maybe even 10 PG's that could make the Spurs better than Tony Parker.
1. Chris Paul
2. Deron Williams
3. Brandon Roy (unless you consider him a SG)
4. Chauncey Billups
5. Derrick Rose
6. Rajon Rondo
7. Steve Nash
That's in no particular order, but I think at best Tony is a top 5.
You're saying that based off one fluke career season (2008-2009), quit acting like that's how Parker has played his entire career.
yes they are. All the players mentioned "overall" are superior on defense in comparison to Tony Parker. I am too lazy to show the pros and cons of each player but all the players mentioned would improve the Spurs if they were traded for Tony Parker.
It's also not fair to judge Parker based off one fluke career season.
He is not that good. Like I said before when Ginobili is healthy, Tony isn't even the best guard on his own team.
This is incredibly wrong. You lose all credibility when you even begin to say someone like Nash is any where close to TP on defense.
Roy is a SG, Nash needs a gimmick system.
When they're both on their top game you could argue between billups and Parker.
I'd trade parker straight up for Rose/Williams/Paul.
The Bulls are 24-25 with Rose. They'd be nowhere near .500 with Parker instead of Rose.
Are you talking about the fluke season where he was a league leader in FG% or the one where he won finals MVP or where he finished in the top 10 in MVP voting? I cannot remember which "season" you are referring to.
Sorry my bad. I was talking about the 5 PG's mentioned very early in the thread. (CP3, Deron, D Rose, Rondo, Chauncey)
My fault. There is no way Nash is better on defense.
Well, he did average 22+ last season and carried a lousy Spurs team to 54 wins and averaged 28.6 points in the first round, including his 43 point outburst. To say Parker is not the Spurs' best offensive player is a downright lie. He has been hobbled most of the year and is just barely starting to look like his old self. And when you factor in all the new Spurs taking shots away from Parker, of course his numbers are going to drop.
16.8 point per game is their best offensive player, they must really suck.
So the Bulls have a losing record, and that is your argument.
Yeah, like Parker isn't the product of a system at all.
47 wins. he was injured for 10 games and they went 7-3 over that stretch.
Those guys are not all better either. Rose is not a good defender, Billups is decent, Deron is decent. TP is on all of their level defensively. Rondo (although I don't think he is great) & CP3 (same thing) I would put ahead just because they are so good at gambling and ball-hawking.Sorry my bad. I was talking about the 5 PG's mentioned very early in the thread. (CP3, Deron, D Rose, Rondo, Chauncey)
My fault. There is no way Nash is better on defense.
Uhhh...?
When it really matters (Playoffs) TP has been damn good defensively, Pop has even said this himself.
So Rose can carry this years Bulls to a losing record. I would love to see what he could do in the West with Bonner/Mason/Finley all playing significant minutes.
I am sure he could get them to "47" wins as you would like to put it.
Chauncey is way better than Tony Parker. Remember that before Chauncey was in Denver the Nuggets were a fringe playoff team. Do you think a Tony Parker led Nuggets team could have the second best record in the Western Conference and make it to the 6th game of the WCF against the Lakers last year?
Seriously answer that. Don't just say "yes he could."
1. Definitely
2. Definitely
3. Not a PG
4. Debatable, he isn't the scorer that Parker is and the Spurs' system is built around Parker being able to score at will.
5. No
6. Dude can't shoot for , no. The only reason he looks so good is because he's playing with 3 all-stars and a damn good center in Perkins.
7. no. We would be getting destroyed every night with that weak ass (lack of) defense.
My argument is that the Bulls would probably have half the wins they have with Parker instead of Rose.
Parker pretty much is the offensive system nowThe "system" works because of TP's abilities, not the other way around.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
