In Retrospect Everyone That Wanted Parker Traded Last Year Was Wrong

[Hoops Czar]

Many of you wanted Parker gone last year for Troy Murphy and draft picks and now even you would admit that you were wrong. Horribly wrong. You should seriously re-examine yourself if you thought that was gonna be a good deal.

Those that did were acting like a bunch of immature Laker fans. Sessions is better than Fisher but the team as a whole is way worse without him, now nobody is there to keep Kobe calm, and he blew up today. Don't start acting like a bunch of Mark Cubans, stick to making this the team of teamwork, defense, and family values.

I suppose those same people are now making the case to trade Ginobili for someone like Enes Kanter or Derrick Williams but both those teams would probably also ask for Tiago and/or Blair in return, and that would be a bad trade. Let's just stick with what we got, screw it. What's important now moving forward is not getting a top seed but making the playoffs 100% healthy. Parker and Gino need to quit falling on their butt, that's why they get injured so often. Just as long as it's not the 8th seed, we have a pretty good chance of getting past the 1st round with the guys we got now.

This team now is good enough to win a championship. Believe.



And thank you to everyone that joined me last year in calling/e-mailing management in asking them not to trade Tony Parker. It's partially because of you we're having the success we're now having.

First off, Fisher's departure has nothing to do with The lakers losing. It's going to take more than a week for the Lakers to find some chemistry after changing pg's. And yes, the Lakers are beter now than they were with Fisher and it's not even close.

Derek Fisher since the trade: 3/16, 4 assists in 73 minutes. And people actually wanted him as a backup.


As far as wanting to trade Parker, don't ever take this forum seriously. Many of those whom wanted Parker traded also wanted Pop ousted, wanted Ian Mahimni to get starter minutes, and wanted James Anderson starting.

[Obstructed_View]

Derek Fisher since the trade: 3/16, 4 assists in 73 minutes. And people actually wanted him as a backup.

The complaint about Derek Fisher was that he couldn't play defense. Look at the shooting and the assists of his opponents.

[Hoops Czar]

The complaint about Derek Fisher was that he couldn't play defense. Look at the shooting and the assists of his opponents.

Exactly. However, many saw him as somewhat viable on offense and thought he could help the team in limited minutes. The guy is done.

[Obstructed_View]

Exactly. However, many saw him as somewhat viable on offense and thought he could help the team in limited minutes. The guy is done.

Not sure who saw him as viable on offense, but there's no doubt he could help the Spurs if he were here. He's a far better point guard at this stage than Gary Neal is, and there's absolutely no way he could be any worse on defense.

And my suggestion to look at the production of opposing backcourts against him was serious. They don't do particularly well. Not exactly a sign that he's incapable of defense. One would think the Lakers' defense would have taken a huge leap forward if he were really that bad.

[Hoops Czar]

Not sure who saw him as viable on offense, but there's no doubt he could help the Spurs if he were here. He's a far better point guard at this stage than Gary Neal is, and there's absolutely no way he could be any worse on defense.

And my suggestion to look at the production of opposing backcourts against him was serious. They don't do particularly well. Not exactly a sign that he's incapable of defense. One would think the Lakers' defense would have taken a huge leap forward if he were really that bad.

He's your last resort, bottom of the barrel, last bullet in the chamber option and you woudn't go around comparing him to non-pg's like Gary Neal. Gary is a trainwreck on defense and only subs uting for the often injured Manu, who is more than capable of holding down the pg position. Patty mills is more than acceptable and should supply ample resolve backing up TP. And i wouldn't have thought twice about signing mills over Fisher.

Statistically, he's one of the worst pg's in the league. His lateral quickness is mind bogglingly slow and he's constantly struggling to close out on shooters. I haven't found any defensive metrics that shows he's even halfway decent defensively. Maybe he's some of sort of statistical anomaly. For me, I woud rather have anybody but fisher.

I will ask you like I did GSH, if you're the lakers, why would you dump Fisher over Blake if Fisher is all that and a bag of chips. And don't tell me it was a youth movement because blake isn't long for that rotation. I give Blake approximately 22-28 more games in a Laker uniform.

[lefty]

We still could use him for a decent C

[tmtcsc]

Tony Parker has elevated his game this year, which has been great. The Spurs needed him to do so to be compe ive. We need to see him close this thing out before any statements can be said about not trading him.

The Spurs were in a world of hurt after getting bounced in round 1 last year. Tim looked finished and Manu was hurt again.

In Tony's last playoff series, he was outplayed by a serviceable pg in Mike friggin Conley. That's still fresh in my memory.

[SPURadic]

TP has been really good for us this season, but seriously, if Chicago offers D. Rose for Parker (if the numbers were aligned) then it would be stupid if the FO declines that.

Cmon seriously. I love the Spurs, been a fan since they drafted Tim Duncan in 97, but I sure as know that Rose would be a lot more dangerous in a Silver and Black uniform than Tony is. They both can create havoc in the paint with their penetration, but Rose is a bigger threat that can open up our shooters better and I believe that Rose can play as the playmaker without consciously looking to pass, otoh, Tony has to mentally prepare himself to be a playmaker, that it takes away his aggressiveness to score the ball.

Just my 2 cents. (I'm a lurker in this forum for a while now)

[Obstructed_View]

I will ask you like I did GSH, if you're the lakers, why would you dump Fisher over Blake if Fisher is all that and a bag of chips. And don't tell me it was a youth movement because blake isn't long for that rotation. I give Blake approximately 22-28 more games in a Laker uniform.

Well, let's not start out with a strawman, because I've yet to see anyone defending Fisher saying that Blake is worth a . You can form your opinions to fit any explanation you like, but the rest of us don't have to agree.

Youth movement? No. Endurance movement? Absolutely. Your prediction about Blake fits right into it. Look at the minutes. Mike Brown is going to run six or seven guys into the ground between now and the end of the season, and they're praying that Sessions is going to be able to step up and play 43 minutes a night before it's over. He's already up to 36 minutes a game since he became the starter. The Lakers rolled the dice that Fish wouldn't be able to take that kind of punishment. Kupchak admitted that he has reservations about getting rid of Fisher, so that was pretty clearly a factor.

If the Lakers thought they were going nowhere and they needed a home run of a trade to salvage any chance of contending for a championship, then they didn't dump Fisher in favor of Blake, they dumped Fisher in favor of Sessions and Hill. Blake simply has no value. If he did, he'd have been able to take the starting spot if Fisher is so "done".

[vander]

"In Retrospect"

Spurs haven't even gotten out of the first round of the playoffs yet.

[Hoops Czar]

Well, let's not start out with a strawman, because I've yet to see anyone defending Fisher saying that Blake is worth a . You can form your opinions to fit any explanation you like, but the rest of us don't have to agree.

Youth movement? No. Endurance movement? Absolutely. Your prediction about Blake fits right into it. Look at the minutes. Mike Brown is going to run six or seven guys into the ground between now and the end of the season, and they're praying that Sessions is going to be able to step up and play 43 minutes a night before it's over. He's already up to 36 minutes a game since he became the starter. The Lakers rolled the dice that Fish wouldn't be able to take that kind of punishment. Kupchak admitted that he has reservations about getting rid of Fisher, so that was pretty clearly a factor.

If the Lakers thought they were going nowhere and they needed a home run of a trade to salvage any chance of contending for a championship, then they didn't dump Fisher in favor of Blake, they dumped Fisher in favor of Sessions and Hill. Blake simply has no value. If he did, he'd have been able to take the starting spot if Fisher is so "done".

My opinions are that of many and I'm not running for office so I can assure you, I don't care about public perception.

Endurance movement? There are a ton of players floating around the D-league with high endurance. I'd find it very difficult to throw away all that playoff experience and Kobe's very own "in house" psychiatrist for a little endurance.... don't you? And if Kupchak had reservations about the trade, then he's lying through his teeth in favor of massaging Derek's morale. I do recall him making an outlandish statement of trading Fisher so he could receive more playing time as opposed to coming off the bench in limited minutes. That's just called politicing and saving face. And if he did have reservations about the trade at all, it was probably because he didn't clear it with Bryant beforehand.

And yes, the Lakers needed to make a change at Pg, and session's will no doubt fill that role like a king in contrast. But, it should tell you something that the Lakers chose style (endurance? Blake) over substance (Fisher).

And to the point, I'm not arguing against the sessions trade, just that Fisher's leadership role and playoff experience trump that of Blake's endurance though Kupchak didn't think so.

[T Park]

Yeah why would you want a championship pedigree un flappable backup point guard for 10-15 mins a night..

[romain.star]

1. I think Parker can outplay Westbrook in a 7 game series. Then again I think if you could successfully teach Westbrook passing and shot selection he would be an mvp canidate year in and year out. Something isn't right with that guys head, and I'm not sure it ever will be. Guy thinks he's Kobe Bryant and his team will win if he puts up 25 points no matter how many shots it takes.

I was willing to entertain the idea of trading Parker and still am in the next 2 to 4 years. Especially when Duncan retires. He's young enough he is still a valuable trade asset and trading him for an unprotected likely high lottery pick, or a young raw big with all star potential is very much worth considering, especially if you can set-up a 3 team deal with a potential win now team needing a top point guard. I'm not seeing it for this season as I think the spurs have a legitimate if outside shot at the ring, and will want to see next year as well. Once the spurs aren't legit contenders as they weren't last year (and I wasn't expecting Duncan to plateau on his decline.) If this plateau holds and Splitter improves as well as a bit more help inside, or Manu gains Grant Hill health (how the is he always broken and badly throughout his 20s yet plays at a high level large minutes and stays healthy in his mid to late 30s?) then don't blow it up. Once it is certain Manu and Duncan are done and gone why keep Parker instead of trading him for young players or picks to rebuild to contention?

Yeah well if my mom had balls, she'd be my dad

Good post though

[Cry Havoc]

It's unbelievable how many years Tony has put up top tier PG stats for the Spurs and only THIS year are people finally coming to the conclusion that maybe we shouldn't trade away the guy who got our last Finals MVP and has 3 rings to go with it.

[MannyIsGod]

It's our depth that makes us contenders, not TP. Do you think that Tony will outplay Rose, CP3, or Westbrook in a seven games series?

[T Park]

It's unbelievable how many years Tony has put up top tier PG stats for the Spurs and only THIS year are people finally coming to the conclusion that maybe we shouldn't trade away the guy who got our last Finals MVP and has 3 rings to go with it.

It wasn't till after the third ring did the majority of people not want Pop fired....

[therealtruth]

Not sure who saw him as viable on offense, but there's no doubt he could help the Spurs if he were here. He's a far better point guard at this stage than Gary Neal is, and there's absolutely no way he could be any worse on defense.

And my suggestion to look at the production of opposing backcourts against him was serious. They don't do particularly well. Not exactly a sign that he's incapable of defense. One would think the Lakers' defense would have taken a huge leap forward if he were really that bad.

Fisher can't defend super quick point guards. He's better at defending bigger point guards and smaller two guards. Outside of that he's good at hitting clutch shots. The guy can miss shots all game and then hit them when they count.

[therealtruth]

It's unbelievable how many years Tony has put up top tier PG stats for the Spurs and only THIS year are people finally coming to the conclusion that maybe we shouldn't trade away the guy who got our last Finals MVP and has 3 rings to go with it.

Parker's Finals MVP is overrated. He was going against a hobbled Larry Hughes and a rookie Daniel Gibson. There was no reason for him not to dominate that matchup.

[TheSkeptic]

Fisher can't defend super quick point guards. He's better at defending bigger point guards and smaller two guards. Outside of that he's good at hitting clutch shots. The guy can miss shots all game and then hit them when they count.

Although if he'd hit shots earlier his late-game heroics wouldn't be needed...

For myself, I get that being clutch is important but I'm not a fan of regularly winning by the skin on my teeth if it can be avoided.

Right now Fisher doesn't provide more than late game 3 point shooting and veteran leadership. Neither of which the Spurs really need at this juncture.

[Obstructed_View]

Fisher can't defend super quick point guards.

Since nobody in the entire league can, that's a fellacious argument.

He's better at defending bigger point guards and smaller two guards. Outside of that he's good at hitting clutch shots. The guy can miss shots all game and then hit them when they count.

He can also play smart team defense, gets into passing lanes, draws charges, physically harrasses people, and disrupts the other team's flow. All reasons he'd have done fine as a backup for the Spurs. Can't wait to see Patty get some run, and I hope he makes us forget all about Fish.

[LoneStarState'sPride]

so you wouldn't trade TP for CP3?

Nope

[Cry Havoc]

Parker's Finals MVP is overrated. He was going against a hobbled Larry Hughes and a rookie Daniel Gibson. There was no reason for him not to dominate that matchup.

Do you want me to go through the Spurs playoff history and show you every series where TP has completely dominated the other team? Because it wasn't just against Cleveland. But do continue to discount DOMINANT FINALS PERFORMANCES because the cir stances were merely favorable.

[rascal]

I din't want to trade Parker but I did want to trade Manu.

Now that is the one the Spurs should have traded. The Spurs are winning with very little input from Manu this year.

[Obstructed_View]

No single player has been more pivotal to the Spurs' playoff success or failure since his arrival than Tony Parker. When Parker plays well and is able to break down defenses, they win. When Parker is stopped up and unable to penetrate, they lose. The '03 team was able to count on a miraculous game from the backup to overcome Parker's bad play, and Pop was able to swap defensive assignments in '05 against the Pistons to make the matchups work in their favor.

[therealtruth]

Being able to trade Parker for a talented bigman would have helped but at the same time he was at least able to bring Diaw.