Reply With Quote
Trolling aside, the Spurs need Rique's selfish/dribble dribble ass playing at a high level to contend. If he drives and finishes in the paint, the Spurs are a lock for the repeat.
Yes, CP3 was terrible (although he was playing through injuries IIRC) in the 2012 semifinals. Are we going to act like Parker has never had a bad series?
Parker in the 2014 WCF: 13.2 ppg (51.9 TS%), 2.2 rpg, 4.8 apg,
CP3's teams fall apart when he goes to the bench in the playoffs. Call him ball-dominant or whatever else you want - his teams play FAR better when he's on the court, something that can't be said for Parker.
Clippers in the 2014 playoffs with CP3 on the court: Net RTG = +7.1
without CP3 on the court: Net RTG = -15.7
So while he was on the court, they outscored their opponents by a noticeable margin. When he went to the bench, the entire team fell apart. And before you say "well that's because he spent most of his minutes playing with Griffin and Jordan!" - no, that's not it. CP3 is the only person that exhibits those sort of numbers. Clippers still did just fine with Griffin or DJ on the bench.
Did you really just bring up a single instance to argue Parker is as good of a ball-handler as CP3?Come on now. Parker is a great ball-handler. CP3 is arguably the best ball-handler in the league, right up there with Curry and Kyrie.
Trolling aside, the Spurs need Rique's selfish/dribble dribble ass playing at a high level to contend. If he drives and finishes in the paint, the Spurs are a lock for the repeat.
Ricky Rubio at #12 this ranking is pure trolling dude is not even #126.
I do hear you. I don't in any way argue Tony is top-anything in terms of PG's this year. He's frankly too difficult to assess as he struggles through this year.Lillard isn't that selfish (he's shown no problems with letting LMA be the #1 guy who gets the most touches). It's not like Parker doesn't have moments where he gets frustrated and barrels into the paint wrecklessly, usually resulting in a TO or poor shot.
I'm not sure what leads you to believe other PGs couldn't have great games as well. Lillard had some monster games in the playoffs. Look at what CP3 did in Game 1 against OKC. These other PGs I've named aren't bad players. They're great and are just as capable of taking over games as Parker.
I just really don't see how anyone could still argue Parker is a top 3 or 5 PG in the league at this point. Again, I'm not saying he sucks or that the team is better off without him like some of the anti-Parker trolls here. I just don't see any argument for him being ahead of guys like CP3, Lillard, Conley, etc. aside from the tired, cliche arguments like "Parker is a proven winner"
But the argument requires more than just saying "other PG's have great games." Sure they do, but that isn't my argument nor does it counter it. My argument is that TP did things for the Spurs in the 2014 Playoffs, and leading up to them, that I don't know any other PG could have done as well. Even if you grant some other PG 1-2 years in the Spurs' system. He had multiple great games and key performances that frankly saved the Spurs' ass. TP grew up in the Spurs system. He has advantages no other PG in this league would have. And he is an all-time finisher for a PG, historically. And one of the all-time fastest PG's in terms of minutes/distance traveled.
I understand your objections over the misuse of narratives, but narratives are unavoidable. It is not all BS to say "Parker is a proven winner". It is vague and qualitative, but it can be meaningful. There is absolutely a phenomenon where some players have a knack for good decision making on the court that helps lead to wins. This is a human sport in which there are 1,000,000 variables at any given time. Stats can only ever approximate an element of what is going on, and when they are used together as they always are, you are making thousands of unspoken qualitative assumptions.
The mental approach a player takes to the game is huge. Just use some introspection. Do you "bring it" 100% to your job every day? Do you ever shirk away from a difficult challenge and rationalize why? It's human nature to settle sometimes and collect a check, or just settle for less. TP is less of a settler and we have Pop to thank for creating a culture that has a neurotic attachment to winning, and which probably really started with TD and his stoic excellence.
Well this is the main thing here. This article is about ranking PGs, and some people seemed disgruntled about Parker "only" being #8. That's what I was arguing against. I think 8 is a generous ranking considering how Parker has played over the past 2 years or so.
I still think that there are several other PGs who could replace Parker and still have success, but we'll have to agree to disagree. It's sort of a pointless argument because we'll never know.
Again, I'd just like to see more actual arguments based on how players actually play and what they do well on the court. If you think Parker is better than CP3, explain WHY. "Parker is a winner and the Spurs > Clippers" is a terrible argument, and the type of you hear regurgitated by guys on ESPN or TNT. Are we going to start saying Horry is better than Barkley? Is Fisher better than CP3 too? What does Parker do on the court that makes you want him instead of CP3? Even if you say something I disagree with, at least you're saying something of substance, and not spewing bull narratives that lack context.
Why does the media insist on sucking point guards' s all the time? PG-led teams don't win anything.
Never said Parker was a good defender. To put all of Irvings 57 on Parker isn't true. Kyrie was making them over Green and Leonard as well and they are both elite defenders.A contest is a weak ass stat. Pretty sure Bonner/Enrique weakly putting their hands in the air is considered a contest. Statistically it's equivalent to a Kawhi/Danny contest, even though the latter is much more effective.
Kyrie's 57-point game was a fluke. Not afraid of the Cavs at all, should we meet in the Finals.
Called evenly, I'd take the Spurs in 5 or 6. They do have 4 players that can go for 30 on any given night their defense is still average and they go iso late in games.
Go for 30 what? 30 minutes? 30 combined turnovers? What's the punchline? Has to be one. Either that or you don't understand what "on any given night" means.
This. If they need a performance like that to win, we'll take the series 4-1.
Hahahahahahaha it's April 2nd now bro. Ty Lawson, GOAT trolling.
2014 Spurs:
All-Stars (as voted by NBA coaches) - Tony Parker (PG)
All-NBA Players - Tony Parker (PG)
Leading Scorer (Regular Season) - Tony Parker (PG)
Leading Assists (Regular Season) - Tony Parker (PG)
Leading Scorer (Playoffs) - Tony Parker (PG)
Leading Assists (Playoffs) - Tony Parker (PG)
Called the MVP of the Spurs by Pop, Duncan, and almost all professional analysts - Tony Parker (PG)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
