Reply With Quote
lol five game sample sizeYou started off promising, but then, unfortunately... you went down hill.
I really hate to destroy the owner of the forum I'm posting on, but here goes:
Manu Ginobili:
Manu Ginobili
Tony Parker
Richard Jefferson
Gary Neal
Danny Green
Kawhi Leonard
Have you watched the Spurs in post season over the last decade? Parker has been our go to guy player many many times (and i'm talking about his Gibson Final MVP)
i'm not a Parker homer at all but this is BS
lol five game sample sizeYou started off promising, but then, unfortunately... you went down hill.
I really hate to destroy the owner of the forum I'm posting on, but here goes:
Manu Ginobili:
Using your's Nash is a top 3 PG on defenses. Right?
So your saying Parker is only a regular season performer? Judging by your takes in this thread, it seems you became a Spurs fan around Halloween I'm guessing. Parker is a proven playoff performer:
Tony Parker's career regular stats: PPG- 16.7, APG- 5.7
Tony Parker's career playoff stats: PPG- 18.8, APG- 4.9
TP also was won the 2007 Finals MVP.
Tony Parker is the clear answer. He is showing his true potential this year with Manu sidelined. This year has finally proven what I always suspected during the le years: we have three Hall of Fame players whose numbers are skewed because they share the ball so well. Manu showed what his numbers could have looked like with enough touches during the 2010 stretch run. He was arguably the most valuable player in the league during that late run. Tony Parker is showing what he is truly capable of now. His numbers are amazing and he has been clutch as well. I won't even waste time mentioning Duncan because everyone already knew how great he was.
I can agree with that, especially for Manu as he has aged and he doesn't produce steals as he used to. What Manu definitely has is great sense for when a defensive play is needed (much like an old Spur: Horry). His flopping skills are well do ented and he has had some game-changing blocked shots in his career (or non-blocked shot that ended up in a famous foul).
Tony just has a different skillset and it's just a different player. He does his job well most of the time. He struggles with certain matchups and so does Manu.
As far as I know, it's the PG era right now. Care to post the average PER for starting PGs and SGs and we can debate...You started off promising, but then, unfortunately... you went down hill.
I really hate to destroy the owner of the forum I'm posting on, but here goes:
Manu Ginobili:
Tony Parker:
Edit : Just had a quick look -> 11 PG in the top 50 in PER, 2 SG
Last edited by stéphane; 02-20-2012 at 04:50 PM.
Wait, that's from this season? Manu's played a whopping 9 games total, and the bulk of those stats are really derived from a 5 game sample size (the 5 games he played to start the season).You started off promising, but then, unfortunately... you went down hill.
I really hate to destroy the owner of the forum I'm posting on, but here goes:
Manu Ginobili:
Tony Parker:
I don't even want to post the net production stats, they are pretty embarrassing for Parker.
On top of that, I wasn't even really talking about this season in regards Ridnour, but LOL @ him scoring 17 on him again this year. Probably his season high. And I don't have to go back far whatsoever to see someone torching Parker. Randy Foye just did it, inexplicably. Rodney Stuckey also just recently ed him up good.
That's sort of why I posted overall PER ratings a post ago, to show just how skewed Ginobili's overall ratings are due to his brilliant 5 game performance to start the season (under no cir stance can you argue that Ginobili has been the 6th best player in the league overall so far).
^Plus those stats haven't been updated since the 15th, which cuts down the size even further.
Wheres the option for Timmy at ?
And this is also a good point.
Imagine a 1 game sample size where Manu guards Keith Bogans while Tony has to guard Chris Paul.
Keith Bogans probably has a terrible PER to begin with. Maybe Keith Bogans typically has a PER of around 8.0 while Chris Paul has a PER of around 22.0.
If (from this one game sample size), Manu's "opponent PER" is 8.9, he's actually doing a bad job given that Bogans typically has PER of around 8.0, and Tony is doing a good job if he can contain a 22 PER player (Chris Paul) to around a 15.0 PER.
If Kewni Leonard wants to use PER, he needs to look at the deviation from average PER, not an aggregate of opponent PER all together. The latter fails to take into account the fact that the average SG Manu may be guarding may just flat out be worse than the average PG that Tony has to guard.
someone didn't see the (wings and backcourt)
Seriously though, Kewni Leonard just provided a terrific example of abusing advanced statistics to make a point.
There's a reason why PER isn't calculate for every player in the league. Imagine a scrub on team A who enters the game for a minute, gets a lob dunk, and then gets injured and has to leave. He's scored 2 points in that minute and is "on pace" to score 96 points per 48 minutes. If we calculated his PER based on his 1 minute outing alone, it would be off the charts (>50).
That's what you're kind of doing with Manu. I gave the extreme example of scoring 2 points in a single minute to illustrate the point, but Manu's case is not so far off. 5 games is a really low sample size.
He also has his history of poor play in the playoffs tbh. I think out of the Big 3 he has easily been the least dependable in the postseason. Speedy in 03', being completely neutralized in 04', Michael Conley, etc.
Not to pull a Kewni but . . .
Oops.
whoops
OP had an agenda obviously thus the limitation but Tim has been pretty consistent too so far... Of course he had some really bad games but overall I think he is much better than last year.whoops
True, but to think tp is a regular season performer only as some on here think, is laughable tbh.
Don't agree with that wording. If you want to say he's played poorly at times on the playoffs, that's fine.
In '03 and '04, Parker owned a pair of Hall of Fame point guards so hardcore that the Nets and Lakers had to shift their entire defense to focus on Parker. To those team's credit, the changes worked. But holding that against a player who was as old as Cory Joseph is pretty unfair, if you ask me.
Parker deserves blame for whatever happened last season. I was one of the first in line to criticize him for that egg laying.
But Manu hasn't exactly been Mr. Dependable at all times. I mean, compare the overall numbers from the Nets series you brought up:
Parker vs. Nets in 2003
212 minutes
84 points
32-for-83 (38.6%) from the field
6-for-14 (42.9%) on three-pointers
25 assists
11 turnovers
Ginobili vs. Nets in 2003
172 minutes
52 points
19-for-46 (34.8%) from the field
3-for-14 (21.4%) on three-pointers
12 assists
10 turnovers
Despite those numbers, history somehow remembers Parker as a choker and Manu as a hero. No one remembers that Manu was 1-for-7 in that last game before that RJ steal and dunk.
Ginobili shot 28% against the Suns in the first round in 2003 but history remembers Parker's struggles with Marbury.
Nobody ever mentions that Ginobili has a shooting percentage of 35.8% on the road in the Finals, or that he was averaging 12.7 points on 32.7% shooting from the field and 26.3% on three-pointers through the first nine games of the 2007 playoffs. Or his defense on Peja Stojakovic in 2008 almost lost the series or that he turned Sasha Vujacic into Bill Russell in the next series.
Why does Ginobili have the rep of a playoff warrior and Parker have the rep of a liability? Well, first of all, I think Ginobili has earned his rep. He's one of the best big-game players in the history of basketball. If I'm putting together a team to win one game, Ginobili would be one of the first players I pick. I can't stress enough how much of a bad ass Ginobili is.
But Ginobili hasn't been immune to laying eggs. He was worse to start the 2007 playoffs than Parker was last season against Conley. Luckily, the Spurs had enough depth in 2007 to withstand Manu's slump. Last season, the Spurs were dead when Parker couldn't outplay Conley.
Duncan has been the foundation of the last three championships. Historically, the Spurs have needed two of the big three to play at a superstar level to get playoff wins. Out of Ginobili and Parker, I'd say they are about equal in being that second superstar player who has stepped up over the years.
Unfortunately, going forward the Spurs will probably need all three players to play at their best to win playoff series. There's much less room for error nowadays. Gone are the times the Spurs could absorb a Big 3 slump ... as the Memphis series made painfully clear.
timvp with the goods
Jestersmash has always brought the goods when it comes to advanced stats. Dude knows his stuff. And timvp, even when not in the mood, will do work on that ass.
I don't know what you're talking about.
/thread, IMO
I can't stress enough how much of a bad ass Ginobili is.
^
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
