Playing next to a top 5 all-time great like Timmy will do a lot for your career.
This is how you can tell which posters just hate Parker no matter what.
They'll gossip like little girls, try to retcon the past, change player quotes, even change their own quotes.
THE AGENDA.
Parker's '05 numbers are horrific. Credit to Manu for being the true playmaker on that team. Dude ran the Spurs offense better than Nash ran the Suns offense when they met up in the Conference Finals.
prime Duncan/Manu and kawhi+ all time great team canceling him out imho
That number is more than the number of white pussies you'll ever sniff
For '02-03 and '04-05 the Spurs were a defensive team, so of course his stats looked bad. Also he wasn't the MVParker that he was in later years.
As far as his actual BPM, I'd like to see the math behind those numbers. If you look up Tony's page on that website it lists his '13-14 season as -0.5 not the -1.2 listed on the page you found. I'm more inclined to believe there is something messed up in their math on the entire website because of this.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."
Well, four kinds if you count Hairston edits.
And, no, Spurs weren't just a defensive team. like this is revisionist history. Look at the conference finals, for example. Suns had one of the all-time great offenses that season(114.5 ORtg). Against SA in the playoffs, their ORtg was 114 ORtg. No drop-off whatsoever. It wasn't the Spurs defense that beat them - It was the Spurs offense that destroyed 'em. We went nuclear on them and beat them at their own game. In the reg season, SA was a 107.5 ORtg team. Against Phoenix, our offense skyrocketed to 118.6 ORtg. Manu/Duncan/Horry/Barry were on fire that series. Parker sucked, like usual. Look at the individual player numbers in that series:
Everyone's ORtg is off the charts. All look great except Parker and Udrih. Like harlem said, Spurs had point guards in that playoff run. Not that surprising that Chauncey on both of 'em in the Finals. SA was fortunate they had Manu running the offense back then.
Reading comprehension. Try using it sometime. -0.5 was TP's reg season BPM. His playoff BPM was -1.2. Like usual, Tony's overall play took a nosedive in the post-season.
Why did James guard tp in finals if tp sucks so bad
Oh c'mon, how does Brent Barry and Horry get mega high stats if they weren't getting open looks from Parkers disruption? Parker made plays to disrupt the offense to free shooters. I don't care about stats; you can't tell me Horry was making his own shots in 2005 & so.
Yeah, it wasn't all Parker. Gino and Duncan generated own shots. It was so nice though, to have a big three. Spurs will likely never have more than two all star players ever again.
And, no, Spurs weren't just a defensive team. like this is revisionist history. Look at the conference finals, for example. Suns had one of the all-time great offenses that season(114.5 ORtg). Against SA in the playoffs, their ORtg was 114 ORtg. No drop-off whatsoever. It wasn't the Spurs defense that beat them - It was the Spurs offense that destroyed 'em. We went nuclear on them and beat them at their own game. In the reg season, SA was a 107.5 ORtg team. Against Phoenix, our offense skyrocketed to 118.6 ORtg. Manu/Duncan/Horry/Barry were on fire that series. Parker sucked, like usual. Look at the individual player numbers in that series:
Everyone's ORtg is off the charts. All look great except Parker and Udrih. Like harlem said, Spurs had point guards in that playoff run. Not that surprising that Chauncey on both of 'em in the Finals. SA was fortunate they had Manu running the offense back then.
Reading comprehension. Try using it sometime. -0.5 was TP's reg season BPM. His playoff BPM was -1.2. Like usual, Tony's overall play took a nosedive in the post-season.
The only thing you have to remember about Jonhy Dingo screen shot is that Bruce Bowen has the same ORtg than Tim and close to Manu's. Also I'm glad to learn that Bruce Bowen was the worst defender of the team
None of this explains why the Spurs were literally better with Parker on the bench..
Are Parker defenders trying to argue that advanced on/off metrics are biased against Parker, but not against every other high-usage player in NBA history?
Furthermore, during Parker's peak years in 2012 and 2013, the advanced on/off numbers do rate him as a great player that has a significant, positive impact on the Spurs' performance..as many of us "haters" have discussed, Parker was legitimately a great player and top 3 PG in 2012 and 2013, Finals choking notwithstanding..
So, we're supposed to believe that the numbers for every other year are biased against Parker, despite the fact that he rates well in the same numbers during those peak years? It doesn't make any sense, tbh..
Last edited by Malik Hairston; 02-26-2015 at 07:00 PM.
I have literally yet to see anybody on SpursTalk explain why the Spurs were statistically better with Parker on the bench(substantially better, too) in 2005 and 2014..I've heard the arguments for 2003, that's fine, what about the rest?
Bump bump bump. All the Parker hating trash don't realize that the Spurs offense revolved around Parker breaking down the defense and then either kicking it out or trying to score.
Last year against Heat they were game-planning for Parker and Lebron was defending him a lot. That created opportunities for other players to go off. Statistics only go so far in evaluating basketball. There are many match ups going on all the time, all over the court, and only a small part of that shows up in the box score.
Spurs need Parker.
Those stats only show that the Spurs had a better bench than their opponents.
So, again, Parker-defenders are claiming the numbers are only biased against Parker, but not the other starters on the team
Lebron was a terrible defender last year, it was widely discussed in the media, he defended Parker to "hide" and conserve energy, essentially..
And enough with this "makes players better"..how can that make any sense when the team was literally worse when he was on the floor?
ing gots only post catpics when truth bombs go off.None of this explains why the Spurs were literally better with Parker on the bench..
Are Parker defenders trying to argue that advanced on/off metrics are biased against Parker, but not against every other high-usage player in NBA history?
Furthermore, during Parker's peak years in 2012 and 2013, the advanced on/off numbers do rate him as a great player that has a significant, positive impact on the Spurs' performance..as many of us "haters" have discussed, Parker was legitimately a great player and top 3 PG in 2012 and 2013, Finals choking notwithstanding..
So, we're supposed to believe that the numbers for every other year are biased against Parker, despite the fact that he rates well in the same numbers during those peak years? It doesn't make any sense, tbh..
According to these stats Parker, Udrih, & Barry were better defenders than Bowen. In fact, according to this chart, Bruce was the worst defender on the team.
Is that accurate in your opinion?
What is the purpose of this campaign?
Some fluctuation is alright between ORTG and DRTG between players. According to these stats. Tony parker was a ing cancer and no amount of debate is needed to understand he ing sucked . You got that got?
lol you're so angry.
All I know is that if this chart is the holy grail of accurate analysis, then Bruce Bowen was the worst defender on the Spurs that series. Sound good to you?
Playoffs or regular season stats? If you say RS you are a ing re .
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
