Reply With Quote
2009 Parker > 2005 Manu
Yeah that was my first thought as well
2009 Parker > 2005 Manu
Anyone who picks Tony doesn't know basketball.
No question Tony,far better at running the sets and in his prime unparalleled at finishing at the rim for a pg.Not to mention taking care of the ball and not being foul prone.
Plus Parker never leveraged the team on his pay like Many did this year.Damn Timmy was taking cuts and he was still the best defensive player in the league last year.
Manu should a walked to Philly,that crap would a been what he deserved tbh
... was at that game tbh
For this particular team I'd pick Parker for his penetration abilities, that would be deadly with Danny, Kawhi, LMA tbh.... plus he plays more minutes, plus he has less risk to be injured
MVParker would fit like a glove TBH
Tiago was important too ... he did not play in game 1
If you put prime manu or prime Parker on this team kawhi will be back on a spot up shooter role tbh....because prime manu/Parker was too ball dominant because of their penetration so it means less touches or ISO for kawhi..
If cat got and his alts voted, it might be a close poll.
Having a starting unit led by LMA and Kawhi only to be followed by a duo of prime Manu and Patty would be fire. I wouldn't mind crunch time being Patty/Prime Ginobili/Kawhi/LMA with the fifth spot between Green, Dedmon, Gasol, or Bertans depending on matchups.
2005 Manu was an unstoppable force
Then ing senile Pop decided Porkeer should have the ball more the following season
What a ing re ed move
Prime Manu owned Europe, FIBA compe ions and was a key player in Spurs les.
Prime Enrique would freeze out Kawhi. No thanks. Give me prime Manu.
I agree that Prime Parker would not fit well with this starting lineup. Sure, his speed and penetration would be a huge asset, but he would also be taking most of the shots once he got to the basket. Either LMA / Kawhi would see their attempts go down, or Parker would be passing up perfectly good shots and that asset would be wasted.
Prime Ginobili off the bench, though, would probably give us the most dominant bench in the league, and we'd have another go-to closer at the end of tough games.
Neither of them (or Prime Timmay for that matter) are walking through that door, but while some are offering valid points some of this thread is all about player popularity and ST established agendas.
no kidding
Tricky choice..Against Warriors I would take prime Ginobili, but against Clippers/Cleveland I would lean to having prime Parker..
LAC becoming a nightmare match up for us has coincided with Tony falloff..Choke-Paul has stopped making appearances against the Spurs mainly because he's been resting on the other end since circa 2014.
Technically didn't see Parker's either since she hopped on the bandwagon after 2014...no kidding
Prime Manu. He was at least as good a PG as Tony, and a better defender. Put prime Manu in the starting PG position, along with Danny, Kawhi, LMA, and Dedmon. In a heartbeat.
There may not be any such thing as a clutch gene, but there sure as is such a thing as clutch skill. Five seconds left and the Spurs down by 1? I like prime Manu's chance of getting to the rack and getting a percentage shot as well as just about anyone who ever played. And I'll never forget George Karl claiming that Manu grew his hair long, so that it would fly around when he flopped, and draw more whistles. That's when you know you're in a guy's head.
With Todays NBA a closing unit of Patty-Danny-Manu (in his prime)-Kawhi and either LA (Offense) or Deadmon (Defense) would be a great thing to have.
I do agree that Tony´s skill in his prime were great but don´t fit a team unless you want to make Tony the main scorer.
Prime Ginobili led his team to an Olympic gold against NBA players... first ever to claim that victory...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
