Come on mid... we're talking an average PG vs an All Star... you said it yourself. You can tell me it was an aberration, but you can't tell me it didn't happen.
It was the beginning of the end of the Parker's Spurs. And there's nothing wrong with that, tbh
Again, I don't know what more you want?
Tony's only had 3 playoff series where he's "gone off." 2007 against Gibson, 2009 against Dallas, and 2013 against Memphis. He's never been a dominating volume scoring guard. Efficient, yes. But Damian Lillard he ain't.
sorry for the delay in replying to this because I didnt have access to a pc, but i couldnt let this slide.
no dude you didnt do that. you posted the series stats, then when people brought up calderon you posted tony and calderons line game for game, except midway through you started deflecting to manu and not posting calderons line. then you started to cherry pick with parkers stats in wins, manus in losses, "swing games", putting tonys single game plus minus for one game, then chastising another poster who used single game plus minus to argue back (see posts 39 then 43). go back to the beginning, real basic:
I actually started out by posting the series stats, then Manu fans came in here and started referencing individual games and moments. "Well, if Manu didn't do this and that in this one and that other game, Spurs would've lost the series. He carried us!" Andat using the Kobe defense for Manu. "
I know he was inefficient the rest of the game, b-b-but, um, he hit a big shot!"
The argument against Parker that Manu fans countered with regarding this series was that if Parker played up to par, the series would've never gone 7. Guess what? Manu played well, well under par in 2 close losses (22% in' shooting). So that exact same argument can be applied to him. But he probably dove for a loose ball or something and all was forgiven because "dat heart."
And about those stats in wins:
.
Rk Player Age MP FG FGA 3P 3PA FT FTA ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PTS FG% 3P% FT%
1 Tony Parker 31 231 58 123 3 9 20 27 1 17 18 33 3 1 21 139 .472 .333 .741
2 Manu Ginobili 36 192 36 80 14 37 38 47 3 23 26 32 16 1 22 124 .450 .378 .809
Tony played 39 more minutes, took 43 more shots (over 50% increase from manu's shot attempts), and produced 15 more points. He had one more assist, and one less turnover. he had 13 less steals, 8 less rebounds, and the same number of blocks. Are you really going to continue arguing that tony had an all star level series and that the spurs went 7 because manu wasnt up to par?
Ill even argue game 7.
Tony had 32 points, 4 reb 4 ast, 0 stl 0 blk 3 TO on 19 shots.
Manu had 20 points, 3 reb, 5 ast, 6 stl, 0 blk, 3 TO on 7 shots.
Who had the better game, 12 extra points + 1 rebound on 11 more shots, or an ungodly 2.85 points per shot for 20 points, +1 assist, +6 steals .
I'd rather not acknowledge a complete idiot like TGY, but:
Parker gets held to a higher standard than Manure. Parker has the superior numbers all time (and it's not close)
Rk Player Age MP FG FGA 3P 3PA FT FTA ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PTS FG% 3P% FT%
1 Tony Parker 31 231 58 123 3 9 20 27 1 17 18 33 3 1 21 139 .472 .333 .741
2 Manu Ginobili 36 192 36 80 14 37 38 47 3 23 26 32 16 1 22 124 .450 .378 .809
look at those two lines again, and tell me what standard parker is held to where he can shoot way over anyone else on the team, contribute less every where else outside of assists, do no better of a job at it than the guy you call turnobili, and still say parker has superior numbers that arent close?? In my post that set you off, i said parkers great strengths are efficient scoring and taking care of the ball, and that the critique of him is that he doesnt contribue outside of those areas; this was a bad series for him because he wasnt efficient scoring the ball AND he had uncharacteristically bad ast/TO ratio. Tony's ast/to ratio for the 2014 playoff run is higher, as is his career ast/to ratio.
apparently for some parker fans, a good series for him is an inefficient version of 36 year old manu ginobili with less defense and rebounding (and floor spacing and freethrows). i think much higher of him, for whatever reason this was not a good series for him.
Last edited by diego; 04-11-2017 at 10:52 PM.
damn it, couldnt figure out the formatting for the tables. im getting old, and too lazy to keep fiddling with. mid has a nice clean table posted on page 2
Tiago was the MVP of that series. Shut down Dirk. Manu and Tim get 2a 2a honors. Both Badass that series. Rick Carlisle was ahead of his time and knew he had to shut down a young kawhi. He basically game planned for kawhi as the number one priority. He gets 4. Everyone else was meh. That's really how it happened. I can't make this up.
All the rest of that is just some to argue about. Ultimately, your PG has to be judged by AST's, even if he's a "scoring PG". , in the '14 Championship series, Boris Diaw led the team in AST's. Manu has always been a better playmaker than Tony, and arguably a better PG.
Ultimately, the only real knock on Manu is that he played high-variance ball, too much and too often. That's great when the Spurs are down by a couple, and need a miracle. He either creates one, or he doesn't. But when the Spurs are up by a few, and they need someone steady, Manu still plays high-variance ball, and he loses some that could be won.
I just said it in another thread, but Forbes is a damn deer in the headlights. In an important game, I'd take my chances on geriatric Manu over him every time. Every time. The idea of a FreeForbes thread just cracks me up. I don't know if he'll ever be ready, but holy he isn't ready for playoff basketball this year.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote