Tony Parker. The amazing offensive liability.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

At least Manu and Beno are good Euros from the line!

Dude, Manu isn't from Europe. You'd think you would know that by now.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

IBleedSilverBlack, good effort on that post but I don't think I'd start out by calling Aggie a moron in one of your first posts.

He's got good, solid takes and he usually only "bullies" people who react to him the way you did. His opinions are often against the company line, but that keeps life interesting.

Talking that sort of smack seems very "Ray Allen" to me. Aim higher than that, brother.

[GSH]

LOL. Don't expect to see the hack-a-Tony show up as a strategy any time soon. You are a moron and a message board bully. Tony Parker is not an offensive liability but you are offensive and a liability to other Aggies. Ignore on.

Now that's funny.

I know there are a lot of other Aggies out there who wish people like him didn't advertise their affiliation. I guess you didn't read his reply? He couldn't figure out that you weren't slamming Aggies in general - just him. There's sort of a theme there. Nobody debates that Parker shouldn't be shooting .650 from the line - it's all the other ridiculous comments that got made. He doesn't seem to get that either.

You said a lot of the things I was trying to say - in a lot more detail. The mental game rules in FT's. But anything that contributes (including fatigue) beccomes a part of the snowball. One thing these guys seem to forget is just how incredibly damned good every single player has to be just to get a chance to compete in the NBA, and they don't all have the same skills or talents. The same guys that think free throws are easy because they aren't being defended are the ones that think they could compete on the NASCAR circuit. (" ... anybody can push a gas pedal. Gimme another beer and the keys.")

I've learned a new word for the boneheads that haunt every message board - "trolls". Even a diamond-tipped bit couldn't penetrate some skulls. But for the more open-minded:

Do you remember a guy named Bill Russell? A lot of people think he was the best to ever play the game. Few, if any, ever dominated a court the way he did. His lifetime FT% was a stunning .561. He probably needed to work harder so that he wouldn't be an offensive liability.

Only 4 players in history have ever racked up 20,000 points, 10,000 rebounds, and 4,000 assists. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Wilt Chamberlain, Charles Barkley, and Karl Malone. Their FT percentages?
Kareem - .721
Wilt - .511
Barkley - .735
Malone - .742

We all know those guys didn't work on their games. So that proves it. You can't be a good player in the NBA unless you shoot at least .850 from the line. And all NBA players could shoot that kind of percentage, if they just tried hard enough.

[violentkitten]

Now that's funny.

I know there are a lot of other Aggies out there who wish people like him didn't advertise their affiliation.

amen.

[IBleedSilverBlack]

IBleedSilverBlack, good effort on that post but I don't think I'd start out by calling Aggie a moron in one of your first posts.

He's got good, solid takes and he usually only "bullies" people who react to him the way you did. His opinions are often against the company line, but that keeps life interesting.

Talking that sort of smack seems very "Ray Allen" to me. Aim higher than that, brother.

I've lurked here long enough to know who is who. But it's still my mistake. I never should have bothered to post anything to begin with. I find some interesting news and thoughts here, but I know that any idea that conflicts with his or a few others is going to get bashed.

You're right though. He does have some good takes and he is only abusive to people who attack him first. His comments are always considerate and insightful. So I put together a sample of some of his recent posts for everyone to enjoy. With gems like these the board doesn't need my input.

"You need to calm the down because the whole team is ing up and it's stupid to single out Beno.

"We need to be careful, Flip Murray can fill it up."

"What a ing punk ass ass pussy."

"Brent Barry gets crapped on because his name isn't Devin Brown or Malik Rose."

"we brought in Barry to play backup point guard to Parker. At the time we made that move the Spurs coaching staff didn't think Beno would turn out to be anything but IR fodder.

"Then Pop doesn't have the respect of his players."

"Um, my frustrations with Pop cover our offensive playoff tendencies from 2000-present. It's not about two games face."

"Not to pat myself on the back, but I have been saying for a good two months that Houston is the biggest threat to SA in the West."

"Look, Pop has a very obvious pucker factor in the playoffs."

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Even if Tony sunk down to 40 percent free throw shooting, the hack-a-tony would be a sign of weakness in our opponent....and we'd end up winning.

Remember back in the awesome year of 2003....the mavericks/spurs conference finals.

Everyone was sooo hyped up and ready to battle it out, texas style.

Then the rumors start: Don Nelson has a plan! oOOooOO a plan! Nothing could make us laugh more at these rumors until it got out what the plan was:

Hack-A-Bowen.

Well, hack-a-bowen kind of worked the first game they tried it, but the second game they tried this awesome strategy, not only did Bruce Bowen sink 5 free throws in a row, he increased our lead to double digits. The mavs went on to lose that game.

Why would you base your entire strategy on giving another player a chance to get free points? Bowen is the most unclutch player ever and he nailed that over and over again. They might have been in Dallas too.
Hack-a-*Player* never works....

[Brodels]

I wanted to make a couple of observations about the Spurs free throw shooting in general and Tony Parker as an offensive liability. Apologize in advance for the length. I usually just lurk. Some of the things GSH said were pretty much correct. Some of the other comments were just ridiculous. I decided to respond because this one I know something about.

For the record, I played two different sports [baseball and golf] at the professional level. I should say semi professional since I didn't make a living at it. My shortcomings weren't in the field or tee to green. I struggled at the plate and I struggled putting the little ball into the little cup. I worked with some well known sports psychologists who also work with a lot of basketball players. I am going back to school and plan to become a sports psychologist myself. [I will expect and live with the "if you can't do it coach it" comments.]


LOL. Don't expect to see the hack-a-Tony show up as a strategy any time soon. You are a moron and a message board bully. Tony Parker is not an offensive liability but you are offensive and a liability to other Aggies. Ignore on.


Repe ion is about two things. Developing "muscle memory" and helping visualization. The idea is to be able to be able to shoot them without thinking about it and let the subconscious take over. Repe ion can help that. Repe ion can also reinforce bad habits. If you practice bad technique you might start making more shots in the gym but have trouble in a game situation. Tim Duncan's form is just plain old bad. He overcomes it with great athletic skill and concentration. But it's subject to breaking down under pressure OR under fatigue.

When the Spurs start bricking free throws you can bet that they are a lot flatter. It comes from using the small muscles in the upper body more than the big muscles in the legs. Fatigue contributes to that. Not always because their legs won't work. [They are well conditioned athletes.] But it's a lot easier to toss up a shot with their arms than to force those legs to drive. If a player learned bad technique as a kid it's really difficult for them to keep from falling back into bad habits when they are fatigued. It's a lot easier to talk about muscle memory and concentration from the safety of the bleachers.

Does the Spurs defensive effort contribute to their fatigue level in the fourth? You damn betcha it does. I won't go off about the different muscles used in lateral movement small/large muscles or fast/slow twitch muscle fibers. But it makes a difference that the Spurs pound it on the defensive end the way they do. Does that contribute to free throw problems late in games? Probably. Could they overcome it by concentrating on better technique? Sometimes they do. But some people quit smoking through sheer willpower and go back to it when they are stressed. Maybe not every time they are stressed. But sometimes.

They did an experiment where they asked basketball players to shoot 100 free throws on the court and then close their eyes and visualize shooting another 100 free throws. They found that they missed just about the same percentage both ways. I know that sounds like BS. Why would a player ever miss a mental free throw? After all it is their own imagination. All they have to do is imagine it going in rather than clanking iron. But there's the problem. They can't imagine it going in. If they could they would probably make more of them on the court as well. The human mind is a very strange place to live.


I said I wasn't going to respond to this moron any more but I lied. [The ignore goes on after I finish this post.] Here is an article from the Pacers NBA.com website from last season.

Q. I respect Reggie Miller for all that he has contributed to the game during his career. Obviously, his legacy goes hand-in-hand with the Pacers organization. I know this especially because I am also a Jazz fan and the organization may not still be in Utah had it not been for Karl Malone and John Stockton. With Reggie getting up there in age, and with his performance perhaps not what we all hope it could be, do you feel that Reggie could be a liability to the team? Doubtless we are all happy to see him back and healthy, but if Reggie wasn't Reggie, do you think he would still get the minutes he is getting, or is his presence and leadership on the floor compensation enough for what his numbers might be lacking?

A. At the risk of sounding like someone making excuses for Reggie’s disappointing productivity, there are a number of dynamics at work. Given the near-total lack of offseason conditioning work due to his ankle surgery, Reggie estimated it would take at least two months of the regular season before he would feel close to 100 percent. As a jump-shooter, it’s imperative that he has his game legs underneath him. Well, it’s been a couple of months, so it’s reasonable to expect him to begin showing a little more offensive aggression. He also is working with new coach Rick Carlisle to establish the inside-out nature of the offensive system. That means he has been hyper-conscious, perhaps to a fault, of feeding the post at every opportunity. As a result, we’ve seen him pass up shots he otherwise would take in order to push the ball inside.

That said, the new year should bring a little bit more of the old Reggie. The team desperately needs his outside shooting to keep defenses honest. The more passive role he takes, the more space he’s being given. He must take advantage of that space and re-establish himself as a threat. Reputation can give a player presence for a few weeks, but production eventually has to back it up. Though he has been in a shooting slump for a few weeks, that doesn’t concern me. Every season, usually right around this time, his shot goes away for a while. And every season, it comes back.

Wow the incredible Reggie Miller in a shooting slump. And people asking if he was an offensive liability. 'Nuff said.

All of that is interesting and fine, but you still haven't taken on the issue. I posted this as a response to GSH in another thread, but he didn't have anything to come back with. I would like to hear your comments, because you haven't addressed the argument that's been put out there:

Quote:

Newsflash: if a team's gonna get beat for a bucket by Reggie Miller late in the game, they're going to foul him. Even Reggie misses one every now and then, and a good defensive team doesn't give up easy buckets if they can possibly help it.

And Reggie is most likely going to make two free throws at the end of a game. Parker is another story.

You can spin it any way you want to, but teams will foul the Spurs at the end of close games. Teams will try to exploit the Spurs' weaknesses in the closing moments. And Tony is the ballhandler. He's also perhaps the worst free throw shooter among the players that regularly finish games. Tony will get fouled at the end of close games. And he'll make less free throws than many other point guard will in that situation.

It's the playoffs. Many games are going to be close. And the difference between going to the finals and going fishing can be a free throw converted or missed.

Parker has shown an inability to make free throws consistently at the end of games. Are you disagreeing with that? If you're not, the only conclusion is that he's a liability in those specific cir stances. If he's going to cost the Spurs 'free' points in important situations, he could cost them games. It's really that simple.

Quote:

First of all, I never said it was good for Parker to be shooting .650 from the line. I responded to the comment that Tony is an offensive liability. You don't like my stats? How about this one? Who are the four best teams in the playoffs this year? Most people would say the Spurs, Suns, Pistons, and Heat. Everybody knows the Spurs can't shoot free throws. If they don't win the championship this year, they are probably going to lose it at the free throw line, right? Just how much better are the other three teams at shooting free throws? This is how the "big four" shot FT's in the regular season, and how they ranked in the league:

Team FT% Rank (out of 30 teams)
Heat .672 30
Spurs .724 26
Pistons .739 23
Suns .748 22

Yeah, but things change in the post-season don't they? I mean, the Spurs are probably a lot worse than those other "good" teams, now that the playoffs are here, right? So how do the "big four" stack up on FT% in the playoffs so far?

Team FT% Rank (out of 16 teams)
Heat .655 16
Suns .742 11
Spurs .755 8
Pistons .813 2

Kinda hard to believe, huh? A piss-poor, mentally-weak group like the Spurs, and still shooting free throws better than half the teams in the playoffs. I guess if it wasn't that raggedy-assed Tony Parker holding down their percentage, it would be somebody else, huh?

Those referring to Tony as an offensive liability are generally speaking of him being that at the end of close games only. It doesn't matter one bit how well your team free throw percentage compares to other teams if your primary ballhandler is a poor free throw shooter and he often has the ball in his hands at the end of games. Team free throw percentage simply doesn't factor in when you're talking about that specific situation.

Quote:

I know it sucks to see guys miss free throws down the stretch. But it's a 48-minute game, and the ones at the end count the same 1 point as the ones at the beginning. The Spurs win by being solid and consistent throughout the game.

A point is indeed a point, but what happens at the beginning of games is different than what happens at the end of games. The Spurs can play solid and make free throws for 42 minutes, but if they're playing good teams, they can still be involved in close games. And the Spurs are more likely to get fouled at the end of games. The fouls in the closing moments of the fourth quarter are often intentional. The way in which teams go about committing fouls is simply different at different moments in the game. And a team's ability make free throws down the stretch can change an opponent's strategy. So it's not really the same.

You've done a good job of showing that teams can win even if they have a poor team free throw percentage. But you haven't really done anything to address the real point: Tony is likely to miss some free throws at the end of games, and missing those free throws could cost the Spurs a win.

At the beginning, a poor free throw shooter isn't as much of a liability. At the end, an ability to shoot free throws becomes much more important. If a player can't make most of his free throws at the end of a close game, he's a liability in that specific cir stance. That's the point you have to counter, and it's one that you're going to have a very difficult time with.

You are a moron

Hint: If you want to be respected, have some class. AHF has posted here a long time and has brought some good takes over the years. And you're bashing other posters in your very first post. People may side with you simply because they don't like AHF, but they aren't going to respect you. I know that many posters will discount what you are saying if you begin by bashing others. Show some class. It can do wonders.

You're right though. He does have some good takes and he is only abusive to people who attack him first. His comments are always considerate and insightful. So I put together a sample of some of his recent posts for everyone to enjoy. With gems like these the board doesn't need my input.

Nice to see you decided to take the high road.

I enjoyed your original post because it shed some light on some things, but it really doesn't address the fact that Tony can sometimes be a liability when he's on the court at the end of close games because he makes less free throws than many other point guards do.

We all know those guys didn't work on their games. So that proves it. You can't be a good player in the NBA unless you shoot at least .850 from the line. And all NBA players could shoot that kind of percentage, if they just tried hard enough.

Who says that Tony isn't a good player because he doesn't shoot 85% from the line? Please find me a post.

Nobody is saying that Parker isn't a very good point guard. All that's being said is that he misses a lot of free throws at the end of games. I know you really can't successfully argue against the main point, but why do you keep bringing up this irrelevant stuff?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

What I love about this thread is it exemplifies the people who take themselves, and this site, too seriously.

The original "Parker is an offensive liability at the end of games" post by me was basically out of frustration at Tony sucking so bad from the FT line late in games, partially in jest.

And here we are two weeks later and people are still getting their panties in a bunch about it all.

I am a big Parker fan. One of my college roommates went to school with Tony back in France, and I've been a fan of Tony's ever since he got here.

But it frustrates me to no end to watch him brick left and right at the FT line. As quick as he is and as often as he gets to the rim, he's probably giving away 3-4 points in a typical game with missed FTs.

And yes, the Spurs have always had a chronic problem in fourth quarters of playoff games at the stripe (this is when the games are close, don't point to last night and tell me I'm wrong).

There's been a curious uptick by the usual culprits this post-season so far (most notably Duncan), but the FT shooting is something that can come back and bite us in the ass when we get to playing the cream of the crop.

I just expect more out of Tony, and I know he can hit them when he puts his mind to it.

The rest of this thread is an exercise in the usual AHF hatas coming out and talking trash. So be it.

[violentkitten]

you are the last mother er who should be lecturing anyone about taking this forum too seriously

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

LOL, okay violentkitten. While we're at it, you're the last mother er who should be lecturing anyone about how their posts on a bulletin board project on Aggies, considering what you've posted here in the past.

[violentkitten]

exhibit A

[ShoogarBear]

Very interesting read. One point though: you state a lot of what the problems are, but kind of skimp on the solutions. I figure that means one of two things:

1. There are no solutions, and sports psychologists are a bunch of charlatans. I understand, since you want to be one, why you wouldn't mention this.

2. There are solutions, but a future sports psychologist sure ain't gonna give them out for free.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

why are we still bashing tony? you peopla are all pathetic, You know what Steve Nash never misses free throws, is anyone out there interested in him? (yeah the defense thing isn't that important)

It isn't enough I guess that throughout his career parker has been the spark to our playoff runs.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I guess that throughout his career parker has been the spark to our playoff runs.

Yeah, he tore up the last four games of the Laker series last year. And to play devil's advocate: remember Speedy Claxton vs. the Nets?

[RobinsontoDuncan]

name a series we have won, or really more than 5 games that we have won in the playoffs since parker's arrival that we have won without him playing well?

[HB22inSA]

I'm not worried about Tony's free throw shooting whatsoever.

He could shoot 50% for all I care, his dribble penetration and running of the offense comes first.

The way the Spurs are playing right now, free throws down the stretch won't matter much.

[Brodels]

why are we still bashing tony? you peopla are all pathetic, You know what Steve Nash never misses free throws, is anyone out there interested in him? (yeah the defense thing isn't that important)

It isn't enough I guess that throughout his career parker has been the spark to our playoff runs.

Just like many others, you are totally missing the point. Nobody is bashing Parker. Nobody is talking about Steve Nash.

All that's being said is that Parker struggles shooting free throws, and it could cause problems at the end of games because he has the ball in his hands so much.

And you might want to use a different example than the league MVP. Nash was the Most Valuable Player in the league this season. I'm not accusing you of doing so, but there is no longer any doubt that at this moment Nash is a better point guard.

[Spurminator]

This is nothing new, Tony Parker's FT "woes" have been consistent all season. That's why the Spurs make an effort to get the ball in the hands of Ginobili or Barry at the end of close games. Haven't you guys seen a close Spurs game this season? Has this been a problem in most of those games?

The Spurs will keep the ball out of Parker's hands in a fouling situation, just as they have done all season long (and seasons past too.) The only time we would be caught off guard is if the other team chooses to foul early, which would - by definition - cons ute a "Hack-a-Tony" situation.

I've scoured the Game Log for the 2005 season, and for the life of me I can't find a single game where we lost a game because Parker bricked several important Free Throws near the end of the game. Maybe I'm missing something.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

name a series we have won, or really more than 5 games that we have won in the playoffs since parker's arrival that we have won without him playing well?

2003 NBA Finals.

You need to back away from the ledge and read the post up above by Brodels. No one's saying Tony sucks, just that he needs to get his together at the FT line.

[T Park]

remember Speedy Claxton vs. the Nets?

Yeah ignore games 1, 2, 3, 5.

He played well in 4 and 6.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Tony Parker is the Chosen Son of San Antonio.

Realize it, understand it, and last but not least, accept it.
He has his shortcomings, but he's only going to get better.

He's a professional basketball player with professional trainers working with him whenever he wants it. He will continue to improve, make no mistake about it.

He's the chosen one.

believe

[IceColdBrewski]

Tony Parker is the Chosen Son of San Antonio.

Realize it, understand it, and last but not least, accept it.

He's the chosen one.

WTF? I think you've seen the "Matrix" one too many times. You've officially passed blind homerism and moved on to the realm of delusional.

You're wasting your time AHF. Same story every year. Parker disappears and reappears throughout the playoffs. But for some strange reason, most Spurs fans turn a blind eye to the bad and pretend it isn't there when it comes to Parker.

[T Park]

Same story every year

except in 03 when Parker won that Lakers series, and Mavericks series and mostly outplayed Jason Kidd.

Ignore that.

[IceColdBrewski]

except in 03 when Parker won that Lakers series, and Mavericks series and mostly outplayed Jason Kidd.

Ignore that.

I remember Kerr, Claxton, and Jackson bailing Parker out in 03 more than a few times. But go ahead and remember your version.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

WTF? I think you've seen the "Matrix" one too many times. You've officially passed blind homerism and moved on to the realm of delusional.

You're wasting your time AHF. Same story every year. Parker disappears and reappears throughout the playoffs. But for some strange reason, most Spurs fans turn a blind eye to the bad and pretend it isn't there when it comes to Parker.

rest assured that the matrix had nothing to do with my post...Ive always called Parker the Chosen One of San Antonio (not 'the one')

Basically the latest spurs draft steal is the chosen one, but manu doesn't count cuz he's already the Chosen Son of Argentina, and you can only be a chosen son for one team.

Moreover, Parker is the Chosen One because due to the fact that a Healthy Duncan = a Duncanesqe Performance, and Manu is always giving 110%, the true indicator of the spurs performance for the past few years now has been one Tony Parker.

When Parkertime is in full effect, the spurs are in full effect, and vice versa....Duncan will always be Duncan. He's noticably getting better on that ankle, and so he's being more Duncan.

My post wasnt saying how he's flawless and a Basketball God a la Raef LaFrentz....
It was just me saying to believe in the Chosen One and stop ing cuz he's still the man.