Top 30 NBA Spurs (Updated every Sunday)

[ArgSpursFan]

. What am I supposed to do? Somehow not mention his pre-Spurs days to refute your claims?Why in the world would being an MVP and best player in international compe ion be less of an accomplishment as a key member of 2 NBA le? ?
By your logic, if I say I'd rather have 15 lbs of gold than 10 lbs of gold, I am dissing the 10 lbs of gold.
Back to the original topic.
Correct me if I am wrong, but going bankrupt is much worse than not being recognized internationally, if you know what I mean.

Let´s just stick to spurs ac plishment,ok?
we all know what ginobili has ac plished as International player.
As far as being a spur,of course I think he has helped the franshise become bigger and greater tham before,don´t you think fans from all over the world buy spurs merchandising and the spurs are followed by Millons around the world on TV?
And not only around the world, inside the U.S. also.
So i finally have to say:Gervin was one of the best SGs ever and Helped the spurs stay on the NBA.
And Manu is one of the most efective(not the best)SGs on NBA right now,and very popular all over the world.
The edge that gervin has againts Manu as far as Career stats,makes it even when you count NBA les,WC les,playoffs games played/won and reg season stats,and all the international ac plishment he has.
It is just my opinion.take it or leave it.but that´s what I think.
BTW,I say it again. I never said Manu was any better tham Gervin.

[Spurminator]

Something to remember about 03 though...Bowen was huge in that le run. I'd say a case could be made for Bowen being the second or third most important player in that run...ahead of Jack.

No doubt, and some of us were saying Bowen deserved to be in the discussion for the 2005 Finals MVP.

[whottt]

RE: Parker in the HOF.


There haven't been many guys who started in the NBA at PG at the age of 19, on the contrary, most of the PGs in NBA history have had a pretty good incubation period and really didn't get rolling until they were about 25. Parker has a huge head start and because of that he can basically put up the numbers he puts up now for another 10 years and be assured of 1st ballot HOF status IMO. This without being such an important international basketball payer. IF you got enough rings you can pretty much get into the HOF without great numbers...I expect at the end of Parker's career he'll have the numbers, the status, and the rings, to easily make the HOF. Even if his numbers hover around their current level.

[Spurminator]

I think if James Worthy and Robert Parish can make the HOF, then Parker has a shot. Needs a couple more les under his belt, but history has been very friendly to starting players on multiple-Championship/Dynasty teams.

[whottt]

No doubt, and some of us were saying Bowen deserved to be in the discussion for the 2005 Finals MVP.

Hmmm...I'm not sure if he deserved finals MVP in 05, he had that huge block on Chauncey and made Rip work, but I'm not sure it was MVP level play in that series.

[ArgSpursFan]

Hmmm...I'm not sure if he deserved finals MVP in 05, he had that huge block on Chauncey and made Rip work, but I'm not sure it was MVP level play in that series.

talking about deserving the 2005 finals MVP for the level of play.

[whottt]

talking about deserving the 2005 finals MVP for the level of play.

And no one from the Spurs would have been winning finals MVPs if not for Horry's game 5.


Arguing anything based on finals MVP is a slippery slope because it requires you to get nasty with the concept of team play.

[Spurminator]

Those were his most memorable plays, certainly. But he also had several huge shots, and was probably the only Spur who brought it for all 7 games of that series, even the blowout losses. He averaged the second most minutes behind Duncan and all but cancelled out Hamilton for 5 of the 7 games.

In the end I would have probably given it to Manu or Tim before him, but Bruce belonged in the conversation. It's hard to pick any one person from that series though, because it seemed like every core Spur player had one or two games that series where they really shined.

[ArgSpursFan]

Those were his most memorable plays, certainly. But he also had several huge shots, and was probably the only Spur who brought it for all 7 games of that series, even the blowout losses. He averaged the second most minutes behind Duncan and all but cancelled out Hamilton for 5 of the 7 games.

In the end I would have probably given it to Manu or Tim before him, but Bruce belonged in the conversation.

the four of them played great BB.(TD;TP;MANU and BRUCE)and Horry in game 5.

[ShoogarBear]

I think if James Worthy and Robert Parish can make the HOF, then Parker has a shot. Needs a couple more les under his belt, but history has been very friendly to starting players on multiple-Championship/Dynasty teams.

Agree, if Parker gets another le and longevity, he's going to be up there.

Although, the counterpoint is that somehow Dennis Johnson isn't in the HoF.

My main concern is longeivity. Parker has put on a lot of miles at a young age and gets banged up a lot. I wouldn't be surprised if his career is shortened due to mileage and unless he learns to compensate for the eventual loss of quickness. I could see him retired as early as 32-33 (which would still be a 13-14 year career).

[baseline bum]

Thinking about it, I think an argument can be made that Parker should be above Ginobili in this list. My first reaction was to put Ginobili ahead of both Parker and Elliott, but thinking about it more ... I'm not so sure.

Obviously, Ginobili's 2005 playoff run was more impressive than anything Parker has ever done. But in 2003, Ginobili played well against the Lakers, however he struggled in every other series. Parker was far and away the second leading scorer that year and was vastly more important in that season's playoffs.

Then you look at two All-Star selections to one, the fact that Parker has been with the Spurs a year longer, averages more points and more assists ... and it has to make you think.

Again, Ginobili was my initial pick for number 4, but I'm not sure now that I think about it. Was Ginobili's awesome 2005 playoff run alone enough to trump everything that Parker and Elliott (another two-time All-Star) ever did?

Discuss.

I think so. Manu played at an All-NBA First or Second Team level in the 2005 playoffs, and he was at his best in fourth quarters. He completely took over the fourth in game 1 of the 2005 Finals, turning a close game into a blowout. He owned game 2 even moreso. Game 7 he tore Detroit up in the fourth once again. He had the assist on the game-winners in game 6 in Seattle, and game 5 in Detroit. He took over the Denver series after the Spurs came out looking really lethargic in it.

Tony's had his moments too, such as the Memphis series in 2004, the first two LA games in 2004, the game 4 vs Dallas in 2003 when he dropped 19 on them in the third, and so on, but the only other Spurs I've ever seen consistently take games over for an extended period like Manu did in the 2005 playoffs are Tim, David, and Ice.

[ggoose25]

5. The rifle man, Chuck Person

[whottt]

My main concern is longeivity. Parker has put on a lot of miles at a young age and gets banged up a lot. I wouldn't be surprised if his career is shortened due to mileage and unless he learns to compensate for the eventual loss of quickness. I could see him retired as early as 32-33 (which would still be a 13-14 year career).

Well Pop has limited his minutes pretty effectively, but yeah it does seem like the guys that get a lot of miles on them at a young age don't have the really long careers.


When Parker starts his next playoff game he'll move into #1 on most playoff games started by a Spurs PG

[ArgSpursFan]

I think so. Manu played at an All-NBA First or Second Team level in the 2005 playoffs, and he was at his best in fourth quarters. He completely took over the fourth in game 1 of the 2005 Finals, turning a close game into a blowout. He owned game 2 even moreso. Game 7 he tore Detroit up in the fourth once again. He had the assist on the game-winners in game 6 in Seattle, and game 5 in Detroit. He took over the Denver series after the Spurs came out looking really lethargic in it.

Tony's had his moments too, such as the Memphis series in 2004, the first two LA games in 2004, the game 4 vs Dallas in 2003 when he dropped 19 on them in the third, and so on, but the only other Spurs I've ever seen consistently take games over for an extended period like Manu did in the 2005 playoffs are Tim, David, and Ice.

you know what?,I can belive people here actually laughed at me when I said Manu deserved the finals MVP more tham Timmy.
I guess people just remember what/who they want to remember.

Another Point on Manu´s side

[aaronstampler]

Thinking about it, I think an argument can be made that Parker should be above Ginobili in this list. My first reaction was to put Ginobili ahead of both Parker and Elliott, but thinking about it more ... I'm not so sure.

Obviously, Ginobili's 2005 playoff run was more impressive than anything Parker has ever done. But in 2003, Ginobili played well against the Lakers, however he struggled in every other series. Parker was far and away the second leading scorer that year and was vastly more important in that season's playoffs.

Then you look at two All-Star selections to one, the fact that Parker has been with the Spurs a year longer, averages more points and more assists ... and it has to make you think.

Again, Ginobili was my initial pick for number 4, but I'm not sure now that I think about it. Was Ginobili's awesome 2005 playoff run alone enough to trump everything that Parker and Elliott (another two-time All-Star) ever did?

Discuss.

I think the main thing is you never have to worry about Manu showing up for a big game.

[YOU REALLY SUCK!]

ArgSpursFan, sup?

[ambchang]

Let´s just stick to spurs ac plishment,ok?
we all know what ginobili has ac plished as International player.
As far as being a spur,of course I think he has helped the franshise become bigger and greater tham before,don´t you think fans from all over the world buy spurs merchandising and the spurs are followed by Millons around the world on TV?
And not only around the world, inside the U.S. also.
So i finally have to say:Gervin was one of the best SGs ever and Helped the spurs stay on the NBA.
And Manu is one of the most efective(not the best)SGs on NBA right now,and very popular all over the world.
The edge that gervin has againts Manu as far as Career stats,makes it even when you count NBA les,WC les,playoffs games played/won and reg season stats,and all the international ac plishment he has.
It is just my opinion.take it or leave it.but that´s what I think.
BTW,I say it again. I never said Manu was any better tham Gervin.

Guy, don't make it sound like I am trying to go off on tangents, you initially brought up the Jordan argument, and you mention how Manu took basketball to the world.
As for the international argument, what is there to argue?
Then you bring out your opinion, which nobody can't argue, because it is your opinion, right? I am just here to point out how illogical it is.
And since Shane Heal brought basketball to Australia, Heal > Gervin too.

[rob5]

Let's cut to the chase. As of the date of this article:
5. Tony Parker
4. Sean Elliott
3. Manu Ginobili
2. David Robinson
1. Tim Duncan

By the time his career is done, Parker would probably rank #3. He's 24, durable, never playing less than 75 games, and is just now coming into his own. I think he has 10 years of good basketball left, and that his scoring will edge up for the next five, and then drift downward, probably averaging out at about 19 ppg. That would put him in the vicinity of 20,000 points.

Oh, and if you think I forgot him

6. George Gervin

Amazing scorer, but suffered from Barkely-Ewing-Malone syndrome...no ring. Only Sean in my top five doesn't have multiple rings.

parker higher than gervin??? what a joke

[rob5]

kerr has multipal rings. are u gonna rank him above gervin also???

[rob5]

you know what?,I can belive people here actually laughed at me when I said Manu deserved the finals MVP more tham Timmy.
I guess people just remember what/who they want to remember.

Another Point on Manu´s side

I dont think Tim would laugh. He knows that trophy should be in Manu's case.

[ArgSpursFan]

kerr has multipal rings. are u gonna rank him above gervin also???

but only one with the spurs.so NO!!+we are talking about stars,not role players

[timvp]

but only one with the spurs.so NO!!

More great knowledge.

[samikeyp]

but only one with the spurs.so NO!!

two, dumbass.


If you are going to talk , at least know what the you are talking about.

[ArgSpursFan]

Guy, don't make it sound like I am trying to go off on tangents, you initially brought up the Jordan argument, and you mention how Manu took basketball to the world.
As for the international argument, what is there to argue?
Then you bring out your opinion, which nobody can't argue, because it is your opinion, right? I am just here to point out how illogical it is.
And since Shane Heal brought basketball to Australia, Heal > Gervin too.

And I respect what you think.I´m just standing by what I think thats all.We´r discussing not fighting,it´s all good.

[ArgSpursFan]

two, dumbass.


If you are going to talk , at least know what the you are talking about.

You´re right my bad.It looks like you´ve got a pretty good memory.I hope it helps you remember who was the best player in the 05 finals as well.