Does Tony Parker Hurt these Spurs? Inside the Numbers

[nkdlunch]

the church of manu strikes again

[Jimcs50]

Heading into this season, many Spurs fans were talking about the reins being handed over from Tim Duncan to Tony Parker. However, after a slew of injuries combined with relatively poor play, a vocal minority of Spurs fans are talking quite differently: Are these Spurs better without Tony Parker?

The theory goes that since Parker is a scoring point guard, his skillset no longer meshes well with the more well-rounded roster, thus the Spurs are better with a more passive, defensive-minded player like George Hill running point guard and Manu Ginobili orchestrating the show.

I compared the numbers from the 26 games Parker has missed this season to the 50 games Parker has played in to see what the statistics have to say on this matter.

I'm honestly surprised the numbers are so close. Subjectively, the Spurs play a different brand of basketball without Parker. But statistically speaking, there really isn't much of a difference. With Parker, the Spurs have outscored the opponents by 5.49 points per 100 possessions. Without Parker, that number drops to 5.31.

Looking at those numbers, it isn't fair to say Parker has hurt the Spurs this season. It is fair, however, to say that Parker hasn't been much more of an asset this season than what San Antonio is getting from George Hill.

If you compare the Parker's advanced stats to Hill's advanced stats, the case against Parker becomes even more difficult to make.

Overall, these number reinforce a few points. First of all, Hill should be commended for the job he has done filling in for Parker. He's had big shoes to fill and has done about as well as possible. The dropoff from Parker to Hill this season has been minimal. That said, if a constantly injured s of what was supposed to be Tony Parker helped this team, I'm excited to see how much Parker can help once he's actually playing well.

Stats are meaningless here.

Spurs are playing at a higher level right now than previous 5 months, it is just coincidental that TP has been injured during the Spurs resurgence.

The Spurs will need a healthy TP if they have any chance of going deep in playoffs.

[Walton Buys Off Me]

Good analysis but it doesn't speak to the Spurs' record without Parker.

Is it a coincidence that since Tony went down we've turned our season around, Richard Jefferson has become much more involved in the offense and Manu Ginobili's become the best player in the NBA?

A more complete story would highlight the numbers of individual players like Hill, Ginobili and Jefferson playing with Parker vs. without and speak to the team's record in both scenarios.

I'm not in favour of letting go of Parker but the bottom line is that he didn't come into this season in shape and his injuries and play reflect it.

[ohmwrecker]

This analysis is cool and all, but all you need to understand that a healthy Tony Parker is a crucial weapon in the Spurs post season arsenal is a pair of eyes and a minimal amount of brain damage.

[timvp]

Finally, I don't think you should've broken the stats up as the 50 games Tony has played and the 26 he didn't. I think the only data you should've used is the numbers after Tony broke his hand. That's the team we've been watching of late. The other ten games he missed are irrelevant. Everyone was playing bad back then.

That's part of the point. If you are going to eliminate the first ten games Parker missed due to "everyone playing bad", how many of Parker's 50 do you eliminate for the same reason? You start trying to handpick the games and the numbers loose even more credibility.

[TJastal]

parker- advantage- speed, one man fast break, shoots 15-20ft
sucks at- cant shoot 3s, not a good defender, coming of an injury(not the same 2-3yrs ago)
george hill- longer, better defender, mesh well with gino and , importantly can shoot 3point shot.
gino pick n roll duncan, drives finds george hill open at the 3point spot, hill for 3(hill can take it)
imagine- gino driving to the lane finds open tony. tony will usually be open 20ft but is too near. tony usually will just drive again forcing manu to back out and spot up.
those who thinks gino will still take control when parker gets back is dreaming. tony will definitly command the floor. manu again will just spot up.
book it.
those who loves parker so much just keep dreaming, parker IS NOT THE SAME 2-3YRS AGO! he is a step slower, liability on defense and cannot shoot the 3BALL.
he just came off an injury, do you think he will be a factor?

if i were POP, if george returns, continue to start george, manu, , dice, and duncan. and let tony lead the 2nd unit with bonner, RMJ, blair, and bogans
but tony is a bone head, he wont accept the bench role. tony iverson 2.0

+1

Pretty much all that. The Hill/Manu/RJ/Dice/Duncan starting lineup needs to stay as is and Parker needs to accept a bench role for the rest of the year to give the spurs the best chance at another ring. We need to take full advantage of Manu's unexpected resurgence and that means no Tony Parker in the starting lineup. Those that think Manu will still get his touches and be as effective with Parker back in the starting lineup are DREAMING.

After the season is over the whole situation can be re-evaluated. I think there is a fairly good chance that Parker will request to be traded. In which case the spurs might be able to land a quality big man. Unless of course Parker would be willing to take on a 6th man role similar to Jason Terry. I highly doubt Parker's ego would accept this however, as spursrocks mentioned.

The only other alternative for Pop to try would be to re-construct the team around Tony Parker by getting rid of Jefferson's expiring for a few spot up shooters like Wally Scerbiak or Trevor Ariza that would work better alongside him.

[Brazil]

^What do you know about TP ego ?

[TJastal]

It seems to me that the Spurs current hot streak is a little like fools gold. All those arguing that Parker isn't needed haven't stopped to consider the fact that Manu is carrying this team out of necessity as much as ability. If he was forced to do this for a full season he'd break down. Sure, if I had to chose one player to win or lose one game, Manu would be the choice; but that really ignores the reality of the NBA season.

Pop realized a long time ago that Manu was best used sparingly in order to preserve his health. In that situation, you need somebody to put up points on this team and Tony is the best option for that.

As timvp himself acknowledged, the numbers he provided don't tell the whole story because they are comparing a healthy Hill to a banged up Parker.

The fact that Jefferson, Blair, and Hill seem to have better chemistry with Manu (for whatever reason) does not change the fact that Manu cannot carry a team for 96 games. Hill might be a great PG in a complimentary role to Manu - but make no mistake, Hill is not doing for the team what Parker did last year. Manu is.

I love how "for whatever reason" has become the standby moniker that TP homers keep using every time they have to admit that everyone on the team plays more productively alongside Manu.

[Spursfan 87]

Manu's starting, that's has been the key for the Spurs recent success.

[Mark in Austin]

I love how "for whatever reason" has become the standby moniker that TP homers keep using every time they have to admit that everyone on the team plays more productively alongside Manu.

My point is I don't care why they are playing better now - Manu cannot carry the load for an extended period of time, (do you not remember the injuries?) so Parker is needed.

If Manu is injured again, this team is screwed.

How is that being a TP homer? That's being a realist.

[cheguevara]

Heading into this season, many Spurs fans were talking about the reins being handed over from Tim Duncan to Tony Parker. However, after a slew of injuries combined with relatively poor play, a vocal minority of Spurs fans are talking quite differently: Are these Spurs better without Tony Parker?

The theory goes that since Parker is a scoring point guard, his skillset no longer meshes well with the more well-rounded roster, thus the Spurs are better with a more passive, defensive-minded player like George Hill running point guard and Manu Ginobili orchestrating the show.

I compared the numbers from the 26 games Parker has missed this season to the 50 games Parker has played in to see what the statistics have to say on this matter.

I'm honestly surprised the numbers are so close. Subjectively, the Spurs play a different brand of basketball without Parker. But statistically speaking, there really isn't much of a difference. With Parker, the Spurs have outscored the opponents by 5.49 points per 100 possessions. Without Parker, that number drops to 5.31.

Looking at those numbers, it isn't fair to say Parker has hurt the Spurs this season. It is fair, however, to say that Parker hasn't been much more of an asset this season than what San Antonio is getting from George Hill.

If you compare the Parker's advanced stats to Hill's advanced stats, the case against Parker becomes even more difficult to make.

Overall, these number reinforce a few points. First of all, Hill should be commended for the job he has done filling in for Parker. He's had big shoes to fill and has done about as well as possible. The dropoff from Parker to Hill this season has been minimal. That said, if a constantly injured s of what was supposed to be Tony Parker helped this team, I'm excited to see how much Parker can help once he's actually playing well.

Parker has been injury hit this season, so really this comparison is not necessary.

It's like wasting time comparing stats w/injured manu and w/out.

[InK]

This is all fine and dandy, but what kinda teams did we face since Tony went down? Its somethin different to have +5pts winning margin against the scrubs of the league and having +5pts winning margin after playing the lakers, cavs, boston, orlando etc....

The other thing is that Manu is just on fire lately, giving credit to Ghill and blaming Parker for this (at least implicitly) does not really seem like a fair thing to do.

So u got 2 anomalies here, and only 20 games sample to support a theory. Better just to watch games and go with ur gut then relaying on stats with so many atypical things happening.

[InK]

Parker has been injury hit this season, so really this comparison is not necessary.

It's like wasting time comparing stats w/injured manu and w/out.

Its really a discussion if an injured Parker is better then a healthy Ghill. And apperently its more or less the same thing if the trust the stats. So the logical thing would be to give Parker limited minutes? For health reasons?

[tothrowed]

men lie women lie numbers dont lie

[ohmwrecker]

I know what dude I am! I'm the dude playin' the dude disguised as another dude!

[oski1000]

TRADE HIM!!! He only plays for himself....

[Cant_Be_Faded]

ehhhhhhhh what a coincidence that ginobili playing one of those vintage total games in parker's first real minutes back

[DPG21920]

Manu had a really poor 3 quarters last night with TP barely playing. He looks tired.

[SequSpur]

watch a game and put down your calculator.

[lefty]

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...6083114AArLoGH

SF Dominique Wilkins
PF Walt Bellamy
C Patrick Ewing
SG World B. Free
PG Tony Parker




Response to JR:

****** the questions probably should have been rhetorical, I give you that. What I asked are in fact the criteria I used to name my starting 5. I wanted to justify why I thought players such as Iverson, Jordan and Bryant would not make my ALL-TIME BALL HOG First Team. I used assists averages on some like Bellamy & Ewing. Ewing has the worst assist average (1.9) of any so-called All-time great center. Numbers aren't everything, but they do mean something. In the case of Tony Parker. He passes the "least with the most". I've never seen a starting point guard with such a talented team...... Duncan, Ginobili, and a host of good spot up shooters....... pass the ball so little in all of my 32 years of watching basketball. The Spurs are hard to watch, but I do notice that in close 4th quarter action, quite often Parker is on the bench. I think even Popovich recognizes that the offense flows better without Parker in the game. I could go on, but I'll stop here.******

[ffadicted]

watch a game and put down your calculator.

+ 100000000

[Creation88]

i have my own compiled stats for Tony coming up. just need to get a good image of them.....i'll start a new thread.

[mogrovejo]

Where exactly did you guys get this "Manu can't play 36mpg through a season" myth? Popovich?

[Mikesatx]

Couple of thoughts: The three top teams in the league have Derek Fisher, Jameer Nelson and Daniel Gibson as their point guards. We had Avery Johnson lead our team in '99. Can anyone name a team that was carried by a point guard other than the Lakers who were led by Magic who also played a little center among other positions? I don't think this thread is about hating on Tony. It is about putting out our best team.

If Tony can find the form that put up a rediculous percentage of points in the paint than we are a better team with him. If all we get is jumpshots and ty defense than I'll take George Hill with Manu controlling the ball.

To those that think that you need a significant post count to be considered knowledgeable about this team or basketball in general you can suck it. Your 30k posts tell me you should get off your ass and become a contributing member of society.

[duncan228]

Asked before the game how Parker has looked, coach Gregg Popovich said, “He’s still cute. “