Parker keeps Spurs feeling young

[exstatic]

Im not convinced that Parker is a big time player yet. Im sorry i just dont see it. he is not a true point guard. he doesnt get his teammates involved enough and cant hit an open jump shot. He came up short in the series with the Mavs last year, and the Spurs will be chasing the Mavs as they go on a 5-6 year run with multiple championships. Right now i'd have to take Jose Juan Barea over Parker.

Thank you, mister 4 posts Mav troll.

[ManuTim_best of Fwiendz]

So okay, he misses the open man that's all spotted up and ready to shoot at the end of the 3rd quarter, and then he's so "focused" that he misses the coach's instructions afterward, and everyone thinks this is fine?

Really?

Okay, just making sure.

That's the "tunnel-vision" Parker's guilty of..

I thought that example was a pretty weird one to draw up, in favor of talking about Parker's "focus"

But yeah, this article is propping him a bit much. I mean I don't see how drawing the Parker comparison to Nash in his second year, by saying Parker already was a champion was anything but a thin statement. There's too much in between to compare or conclude that's what makes Parker's case for whatever case the article's implying(...MVP level player??).

Now, not taking anything away from Parker's great promise, this article is a bit of dodgy.

[exstatic]

I mean I don't see how drawing the Parker comparison to Nash in his second year, by saying Parker already was a champion was anything but a thin statement.

RIF. The comparison is, they were 24, and 24YO Parker >>> 24YO Nash.

That's the "tunnel-vision" Parker's guilty of..

WTF??? There were 3 seconds left in the ing quarter and the ball had to go the length of the court.

[aaronstampler]

if Pop thought the pass was there and there was time, then the pass was there and there was time.

[1Parker1]

if Pop thought the pass was there and there was time, then the pass was there and there was time.

What's your point? You act like no one on the team outside of Parker ever makes any mistakes or forces a shot. Ginobili does it plenty of times, Duncan does it, even Bowen does it. No one is going to play perfect basketball all the time. And in Parker's defense he was in a zone and scoring at will against the Pistons, if that shot had gone in, which it almost did, we wouldn't be having a conversation.

[ShoogarBear]

if that shot had gone in, which it almost did, we wouldn't be having a conversation.

Oh yes you would. Never underestimate the nitpicking powers of the Parker haters.

[1Parker1]

Oh yes you would. Never underestimate the nitpicking powers of the Parker haters.

True. Dude scores 22 points and 7 assists against the team with the best record in the East, and people are still finding stuff to nit-pick on.

[ducks]

1parker1

they hate parker because he is french
they hate tp because his girl is 100 times hotter then their girl if they are lucky enough to have one

[gilmor]

1parker1

they hate parker because he is french
they hate tp because his girl is 100 times hotter then their girl if they are lucky enough to have one

I personally like Tony alot.. more so than Manu..

But to be realistic, Tony is no way near the kind of player that Manu is at the moment. Manu may do stupid things for 3 quarters but when it comes time in the 4th quarter, I can bet my money on Manu for any shots that he take.. He just got more heart and will to win than Tony or any other player on the Spurs roster at the moment. And that's the difference between the greatness of Manu and a good player like Tony.

[veruca]

Hey tony-haters, lighten up. It's just a frigging article giving Tony some deserving props; he's not being anointed best in NBA. Unlike alot of Spurs posters in here, I can actually say I like BOTH Tony and Manu--what a concept! It's not a ing contest between Tony and Manu. Both are awesome players in their own right.

[ManuTim_best of Fwiendz]

RIF. The comparison is, they were 24, and 24YO Parker >>> 24YO Nash.

NOOO... the article says something off the cuff, "Parker an already two time champion." as if we're to forget the other factors behind that aside from Parker's individual progression. Umm,, Nash wasn't fortunate enough to play beside a Duncan or Shaq when he was 24. Let alone he was already a backup for Kidd. While Pop had no serviceable point guard so really worked hard with making Tony the player he is today.

I wasn't alluding to that measly comparison of being developed at 24 or not developed, and I pay for assuming I didn't have to elaborate. When i say it's THIN, I say, just because Nash is an elite player LATER doesn't logically mean all signs point to Parker being undeniably elite. You can look at it this way, how can you predict Parker will be an MVP sometime down the road, by comparing him to a 24 year old Nash? Nash in the last three years, you think he already hit his peak at the age of 30 winning his first MVP, right? Going off age. You can even compare it to Jason Kidd's decline--at 31 he was slowing down or whatever-- but he's still gotten better the following two years! He went from seemingly talented, spry, wreckless point guard who was just good, and looked to be Kirk Hinrich level good not Chris Paul good when he started. Into a ing elite beast who stands in the same class as the Kobes Lebrons and Wades. What I'm saying is to use the AGE CARD IS USUALLY, a thin basis for prediction and comparison. And to put it a step further, you can't rest on your laurels relying on age.
Nash could be considered a late bloomer and Parker can be considered an early bloomer.

And as for you guys throwing around the "hater" card.

That mentality, is stupid and defensive. To use the word Parker Haters makes it seem like, there's more intent in people's comments than there really is. Quit being so paranoid. Any mention of Manu or Tony, to think you have to tip-toe and walk on egg s s on here or else you're gonna be labeled Manu sucker or Tony pole-rider. Or a xenophobe against argentines, or a Tony-basher, is pretty annoying.

There's only about two Manu lovers on here, and one real Manu hater on here. and about two real Parker haters. And most of them probably don't even care who they piss off in their comments.


stop categorizing posters.

There's no such thing as a Parker-hater, if you're a ing true Spurs basketball fan. I never even heard of the idea before I started posting here, I never even considered myself a "parker-hater" but by the way the comments started unfolding on here after a few measly harmless statements. Some of you decide to read into them the wrong way. I don't even know if Aaronstampler is a Parker hater, but I even thought reading his post about the missed shot line, just because he made a criticism about, "hmm, is he one of those Parker haters the posters are referring to?" and now I realize, damn, this paranoid mentailty is pretty lame.

people are still finding stuff to nit-pick on.

Attacking the article is not attacking Parker in any way. It's a shoddy piece of work. What do you expect us all to do? Clap our hands saying, "Yayyy, Parkerrr... The article says he's going to be MVP. Ok, wow, I believe it now!!"
like ing monkeys?

And talk about pot calling the kettle black. You start nitpicking a few harmless criticisms, it's pretty paranoid if you ask me. And stunts discussion. Bite your lip, next time you see a comment you don't agree with in backing your boy, Parker or Manu. And quit saying, "oh this guy here. This guy must be a Parker-hater! " and burn them at the stake. It can blind you from being objective, when you strip them of their credibility, when it's definitely uncalled for. Some people on here ACTUALLY do want to see their players improve, and if they hold high standards. So be it. But don't be so quick to dismiss them. Once you label them, the actual point they're making gets lost. Where did I try to discredit Tony? Isn't Tony not seeing Pop disagreeing with his decision, an example of Tunnel-Vision???

I don't see any reason why we should keep comments middle of the road, "how bout we just like both guys" to appease both sides. We're not always gonna agree what we want to see from our players. Tony is not Manu. He can't do all the things he does.
Manu isn't Tony. He's not always gonna be running around getting a dozen layups in the lane every game, because he can't pace the way he hustles. And because of that, they're bound to be favored over the other.