Reply With Quote
How does he suck?
He's better than you isn't he?
Ray Allen is probobly the best shooter in the game today.
That IMO, would bring unbelieveable dividends.
But, it aint happenin so oh well.
Pepe sanchez stinks, there was a reason he couldn't stick with an NBA team.
How does he suck?
He's better than you isn't he?
Whatever. Ben Gordon is a damn good shooter too, but Skiles decided not to start such a bad defender.
Obviously most people in the NBA think like you, but i just wondered how can the starting point guard of the Olympic champion be not considered good enough.
Back to Chicago, Duhon at the point doenst do anything than Pepe cannot (and Pepe does more IMO) and the Bulls are doing fine for an almost all rookie team, right?
Hendrix, I agree that Pepe can play, but he hasn't been able to make waves in the NBA. There were reports a couple of summers ago that the Spurs were wanting to sign him. He is a terrific defender and consumate team player. He just isn't offensively oriented enough for the NBA perhaps. He is not one to beat guys off the dribble and he just hasn't shot well enough or often enough to help the teams he's played with.
It's interesting you mention the Chris Duhon comparison. Chicago basically runs two PGs with Kirk Hinrich actually listed as the PG but they both really can play the position. Pepe would probably do well in that lineup alongside Hinrich because of Hinrich's scoring ability. Pepe's 6-4, to Duhon's 6-1 size so that could work. Pepe just hasn't been able to score or create his own shots and that has hurt him in the NBA. Duhon has been able to do that.
another intelligent argentinian response.He's better than you isn't he?
T Panqueque get a mirror.
another intelligent american response.
I think sports are a matter of intense patriotism in Argentina, that's the only explanation I can find for how much animosity we get here for the slightest criticism.
Oh well, sticks and stones right? It was like that here once, I'm not sure what happened but look at how well America supports her players now, 2004 summer olympics?
Scola worries me, if we bring him over here can he be another great success story? I sure hope so.
I think be good.Scola worries me, if we bring him over here can he be another great success story? I sure hope so
Whether hes Ginobili level we will see.
I would trade Parker with my eyes closed, not even thinking about it to get Allen or Redd, but Manu?
I would only trade Manu for Allen, but for Redd? I would ask another player involved or a high draft pick, otherwise the Spurs lose in the trade.
I agree that Pepe is a good player, but his style didn't fit into the NBA nowadays. When 90% of the players in the league want to shoot, shoot, shoot when the ball is in their hands, Pepe is a "pass-first" point guard. His defence is excellent, just watch how he guarded Iverson, Marbury, Baron Davis or Kidd in the times he played against them. But that is exactly the kind of player he should play with, a scoring PG, or a scorinh SG. He would fit nicely along players like Iverson, McGrady or Carter, who take more than 20 shots per game.
About Scola, he would fit well into the Spurs rotation if the buyout can be solved. His first year he would go into Robert Horry's spot in the rotation. Because his defence (man to man, he defends well in a zone), and his rebounding would need to be worked through the year.
hey manu.
Your gonna trade a 22 year old point guard averaging 16 and 7 a game that can play damn near every game.
And not a shooting guard who can only give 28 mins a game and play 70 a year???
Uh yeah ok.
Have you read his handle T Park? don't you think he's a little biased? Look at the playoff history of this team, since 2001 as Parker goes so go the Spurs.
*Caugh* 16 and 6 *caugh*
T Park, thanks, you've opened my eyes. Thanks for making me understand that Manu is just one more of the hundreds of SGs out there. We could replace him in a heartbeat. And worst of all, he can only play 28 mps (where the did you get that from) and 70 games a year (he played more games then TD both last year and this year).
And you are not biased?
C'mon man, you should take the mask off. You have favored TP over Manu on every thread the topic has been discussed. You are as biased as the Argentineans who favor Manu, but the other way. You like TP more than Manu. There is nothing wrong with that, but don't come in here on your high horse: "look at his handle" "he is biased"
Hilarious.
2005-06 is time for Scola.
I have no reason to be biased, I think Parker is a better player, and I have a reason to:
in 2002 against the Lakers, the only game we won was the game the rookie PG Tony Parker went off in.
In 2003 we were like 21-1 in games Parker scored 20 pts. in and in the post season his play got us momentum and won us the Phoenix series, after taking heavy criticism for being outplayed by Starbury, he torched him. Then against the Lakers we only won the games Parker played well in. Against the Mavericks Parker was a man possesed the whole series. In the Finals he had two bad games but 4 great ones, two of which he badly outplayed Jason Kidd in. BTW SJax was more important to the le run the season than Manu.
In 2004, Manu didn't show up in the first or second rounds, but Parker was the best player on the floor for the first 6 games of the playoffs, once the Lakers started body checking him every time he put the ball on the floor we started to lose, and Manu was no where to be seen, Devin Brown was better for us.
And the reason you never have seen me take Manu's side is because you haven't been here very long, in the begining of the season there was a thread about who's game would take a bigger leap this season and who would become our second All-Star, Manu or Parker, I said not only would Manu make larger strides this season, but he would also be our all star because he makes flash plays that you can show on Sports Center. No one else concured, but I was right.
I'm not biased, Tony Parker is the most important cog for this team, because he carries us through the playoffs. After Tim Duncan every player on the spurs roster is stoppable, so having parker step up is what makes us so tough to beat. Yes Manu was big tonight, but we could never win a championship without Parker, subs ute today's Devin Brown with 03's Ginobili and you already have won a championship without Manu.
This paragrapgh proves nothing. You are comparing a starting PG, playing 30-35 mpg with a guy who was injured for half of the season, and came of the bench for the other half and averaged less than 20 mpg.
What? Please take a poll to see if manu did or did not show up in 2004 and get back to me. He did not have a stellar series, but he certainly played well many games, scoring 18-22 points several times coming off the bench.
Parker had a stellar two first games against LA. Then he disappeard, starting a pattern which is now way too familiar. Not sure you can use the 2004 series as an argument because neither TP nor manu showed the world what they are capable of doing.
Again you show you biased side against Manu. He did not disappear. He was not a difference maker, but he definetly showed up. Ask Tpark. He probably agrees with TP>Manu but he is not as blind as you are. And Devin had one or two good games. Just because they were the last ones, and the ones people remember more, does not mean he was more valuable than Manu.
Unless you posted under another handle in the past . . . I remember you starting posting not so long ago. I was hear and I can remember every Manu vs Parker debate, you through on the table your biased arguments. Look, I don't even have to link them. They are here, in this thread.
Again, your argument is biased against Manu. He makes flashy plays that make it into SC, true, but he does a million other things that make him an AS. Please don't get me started on this one.
Props to you.
Where do you come up with this ? In 02 he played a fundamental role, but he did not carry us. Other players played as a fundamental role as TP played if not more. And Manu, with the limited minutes he played, did his part.
TP has never carried a team the way Manu has. And from what we have seen from the series against the Nuggets, its manu not Parker who is carrying the team.
Go and tell that to PHO or to the Nuggets. Manu, as well as TP, can be unstoppable on any given night.
Manu was big tonight? That's all?. This is why I'm saying you are so blind and biased. Manu is the reason we are 2-1 vs. the Nuggets. Nobody else but Manu. He turned the tide of the game late in the 1st Q when he came in and he, singlehandedly pushed the Spurs to make a run. If Manu would not have played the way he did in the first half, when almost every other Spur was daydreaming, I venture to say we could have been blown out. Moreover, he had a good 1st game, with 23 pts and he had a very good 2nd game with 17 pts in 18 minutes. IMO, he is carrying the Spurs so far. TP has been MIA.
In a nuts , this is why I firmly believe you are biased in favor of TP, when arguing who is better, Manu or Tony. You never give Manu the props he deserves, you are always downplaying his achievements (making it to the ASG, his role in last year's playoffs, how he played yesterday).
Not sure why you are, but you are biased, make no mistake about it. You are even more biased that what I am in favor of Manu
Is this another Manu is God topics or another Argentina Gold Medal topic? WGAF.
Of course Manu is playing well this playoff series and Parker isn't.
Pop bringing Manu off the bench is a good move. He gets to see the game unfold in the 1st quarter and then come in to help the team adjust and to get on a roll. That is exactly what he has done the past 2 games.
As for Scola, this dude isn't or might not ever be a spur. Who cares.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
