Reply With Quote
The Spurs won't sniff a le let alone a western conference final until they upgrade the pg and sg positions. They are a backcourt away from contending. Why don't the spurs see this is how to compete against Golden State?
Maybe Pop will run slomo at point. We play REAL BIG qand just control the tempo like we used to.
The Spurs won't sniff a le let alone a western conference final until they upgrade the pg and sg positions. They are a backcourt away from contending. Why don't the spurs see this is how to compete against Golden State?
That means jack in 2016.
He's not going to retire. You need to explain how you trade him and who you replace him with and do so with a legit plan or this is a useless thread not unlike 100s of others.
I can always tell a former play-by-play announcer.
To OP :
First off Parker contract with new cap is now much more reasonable than it was.
Second imo Parker should be done playing starter minutes but off the bench as a back up of a starting PG he would be absolutely fine
No. Porker has never even been the best point guard on his own team while he's been playing.
This forum...
lol at people really thinking TP is holding us back.
The problem with Parker is not offense. The problem that he has is the same one that every other PG in the league has...they can't guard Curry. We don't have anyone we can put on the floor at PG that can guard one of Durant, Curry, Thompson, or Green and the 5th player is bound to be a center. So while he is an issue, it is an issue every team in the league will have.
This is true. Unfortunately it is also true that we have no starting-caliber PG, so the job is TP's by default. I think he would be fine off the bench, but who starts?
The Spurs don't see it because, even though they are smart, they're not like you. You're smart smart.
Hahaha wow
I love ST but we already understand that parker sucks and is a burden and it doesn't have to be reminded on a semi daily basis
That made me laugh.
Remember 2014? Didn't finish clinching game against Portland, no problem.
Didn't finish clinching game against OKC, didn't need him. Might not win if he did play.
Then game 5 against Miami. Kawhi and Manu led a massive comeback blowout. And Parker was beyond trash, 0:10 until garbage time late after Miami had quit.
He just isn't good enough to matter if he doesn't play. He's replacement level. And against GS he's worse. Sad.
So in your first example, it was about Parker not playing the whole game (even though we won 3 others with him).
In your second example, it was all about Parker not playing the END of the game.
In your third example, it was all about Parker not playing well at the BEGINNING of the game, even though he closed out G5 with one of the better clinching 4th quarters in Finals history.
Oh and of course in your last example, you note how he can't play against GS, even though he outplayed Curry to win that playoff series.
About the level of consistency you can expect from ST Parker haters.
I see the anger towards TP predominantly here on ST, so maybe my opinion has been warped by that.
But I'd be interested to know how the feeling towards TP is at ground zero - San Antonio?
For you locals, can ya'll clue us in on how faithful the local fan base is towards Parker...like is it at the level of a Manu/DRob/Elliott?
If that is the case, then I can certainly understand ownership not willing to take the bad press to make a 'basketball' decision.
Well, Pop could just hand the ropes to Murray raw he is as a rookie, like he did to TP all those years ago. With the talent we have in the frontcourt we probably could still cruise to the second (or at worst) third seed in the West while Murray took his lumps on the job and hopefully he develops under fire and is a "pro" by the time the postseason rolls around. Despite the superteam in GSW, the league as a whole is generally down. Time to let the youngsters learn while we can beat other teams by talent and coaching alone. Of course, this very unlikely hypothetical could only happen by Murray wowing Pop in training camp. Doesn't help he's not even playing in SL.
I don't think it will happen. But as I said, a long time ago the Spurs started a 19 year old French rookie and let him learn on the job. I believe they won the le the next year.
The 2003 offense is much much different than the current. And the defensive intensity without an all time great shot intimidator is a frustratingly large problem. It's just not a good idea.
It's not a terrible idea. Just throwing Murray out there. But have to make sure they don't ruin his confidence.
Although it's a much different situation than they had with Parker imo. Parker had so much experience at that age and was so fast that he almost instantly jumped in. Murray is very raw compared to 19 year old TP.
Good point.
The anger is nothing more than part time basketball fans desperately seeking approval from anyone on the internet.
See how many awesome ideas and invaluable posts are taking place in this thread? Yeah neither do I. Not one meaningful post or reasonable suggestion here.
I for one would love to see the PG spot addressed but at this point there's little out there that would make sense...and not just for the Spurs but for any potential trade partner. There isn't an ounce of intelligence in threads like this. Its the same old desperate attention seekers hoping others will validate their worthless opinions.
I think Westbrook for Parker and a pick makes a lot of sense for both teams. OKC gets a proven vet PG with more years left on his contract. Spurs take a chance on a 1 year ride with Westbrook.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
