trying to pretend you would even think about not posting in a thread that speaks blasphemy against Manu or Messi.
sons this one goes to Ray, but not by much
Manu deserves props for helping carry the Spurs over the last 4 or 5 seasons. In 2007 both Manu and Parker won that championship. In recent years Manu has been the man for the Spurs and the only reason they have been a playoff team.
Yeah, whoever it is its not by much. You really can't be wrong with either choice. Best argument I can see for Ray is that he plays more minutes at the same level. Who knows if Manu would go up or down with more playing time.
Jesus Shuttlesworth
Ray's shot is just too automatic. I think Manu is probably better in most other categories (not substantially better, but just a bit above), but Allen's shot being so consistently good and so much better simply ends the debate, IMO.
Huh?! Nowhere near?! Are you serious?!
I love nique, he is one of my all-time favorite "non Lakers". it's one of my favorite debates ... and wilkins on the end of a Lakers break would of been amazing. But Worthy was the better mid range shooter, better post player, better passer and better defender. Nique was a better, scorer and rebounder.
In a va you take Nique but much like Mchale ...Worthy was the perfect #2 and #3 option for those le teams. No way they are as good with Nique. He was shot happy (kinda like Kobe) and no way he would of been comfortable "eating" after Kareem and Magic. Not sure Worthy could of carried those Hawks teams the same way either. Yes Worthy would of scored more as the #1 option ...but not the way Nique could, who was just gifted athletic scorer whose jumper got better over the years. But Worthy's fundamentals beats Nique's ...though watching Worthy dribble in the open court (he alwys dribbled too high for my tastes) was comedy ...
Manu is better at slashing, creating for others and defending than Ray
Come on now
pretty much even here. I'd pick Manu cause he's white.
not because I'm racist. every team needs a token white boy. might as well be one that can play.
It's pretty close. Allen is better off screens, has a quicker release and is more accurate, but Manu is a good enough shooter to keep his defender honest and is more dangerous off the dribble when his defender closes out. Manu is a better passer and defender, as already mentioned, but he makes more errors because he is more involved in the offense than Allen.
If you combined the skills of Ray Ray and Gino, you might have a legit challenger to the GOAT.
Ray has a more accomplished looking career, but I would take Manu all day long.
Manu is much more capable of putting a team on his back offensively.
This debate is close...
but Manu is by far the more interesting baller (despite never been asked to star in a Hollywood film)... you never know what you're gonna get... other than lots of winning.
Manu goes 0 for 10 in a game... but then dives off of the court and zips a perfect pass to his teammate, as the game clock is winding down (saving the possession). Spurs win on a buzzer beater.
Manu scores a GW layup under the defender's arm and then draws an offensive foul on the last play of the game. Spurs win on the road.
Manu scores 24 consecutive points on the road. Spurs win in a blowout.
Manu swats a bat out of the air on Halloween night (because it kept interrupting the game)... Spurs win with his aura... he then is given several rabies shots... the legend of Batman(u) grows...
and many, many, manu more...
look out daf
Manu Ginobili, is who I'd take.
Live and die by Manu
And all you Ray Allen nuthuggers.
tee, hee.
Far as America's concerned that boy is pure .
I googled "allen manu" and some Picc dude posted his opinion in the same thread on RealGM
I guess it was you
I'll take Rayray because I love the daggers, and I'm a homer.
I am going to go with Manu on this one.
Defense- Manu
Passing- Manu
Rebounding- Manu
Assists- Manu
Scoring- Ray
FG%- probably Ray
Steals- Manu
FT%- Ray
Blocks- Manu
Awareness- Manu
I would consider durability, but we are considering performers at their peak. At their peak, I would rather have Manu because of the many different dimensions he can bring.
You are stupid.
It´s close, and even though I´m from Argentina, I think that Ray was a bit better. However, Manu also plays with our NT almost every year, and a lot of playoffs games with the Spurs (between 2003 and 2008). Those extra games add a lot of wear and tear to the body. Last season, Manu rested and then produced a very good season considering he was 33 years old. In fact, as he relied more to his 3pt shot, he played in 80 regular season games (career high). I think that neither can lead a team to a championship as the first option, and they are better suited to be 2nd to a dominant big, at least in the NBA.
Both in their primes, Ray Allen was probably the better player.
But personally, I'd rather have Manu on my team between the two. Ginobili brings all the intangibles you'd want from a star player without needing to be one. And in his prime, especially with the game on the line in crunchtime, he was at or near the level of most of the other star wing players in the league. Probably a notch below guys like Kobe and Wade. But he was in the neighborhood. He could be that "superstar" player in the final 4 minutes of a close game.
lol, grey name.
Ray Allen. Purely because it would be awesome to have the leading 3 point scorer in NBA history on a Gregg Popovich team.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote