I've been asking them that question for weeks. Still haven't heard an answer. The only name that came up was Marbury
the only reason marburys name is coming is cuz marbury use to kill the SPURS and TONY PARKER especially...
and ya'll know he's getting OLD... he's already in his 30s and he hasn't done in his career... tony has 2 championship rings, and all he has is... his NICKNAME, which eh gave himself
No one seems to bring out the fact that he went toe to toe with last season's League MVP. The article mentioned it... but really didn't give it the importance it deserved.
Getting outplayed by Billups is not the end of the world. Billups is a big-time performer and having played against him, is only going to make Parker a tougher cookie (or crouscant).
He is only 23!!!
You don't trade him based on the fact that it would take any other player, no matter how good, at least a year to adapt to the Spurs' system. Like MB mentioned, that would rob Duncan of one more year of his prime. That in itself is an untradable commodity.
If Tony doesn't start making the people around him better, he'll turn in to Marbury. Marbury is a great scorer and fun to watch. But he doesn't make the players around him better...This is why Kidd made the Nets so much better than he did etc...even though Kidd doesn't score as much.
Everyone needs to stop being defensive about the whole Parker thing. It doesn't say he WILL get traded...But if any of you think that Tony Parker is the caliber of player that is "UNTOUCHABLE" you are MOST CERTAINLY FOOLING YOURSELVES. He isn't at that level yet. Again, I'M NOT SAYING he should be traded...I am only stating that he is not at the level where he is untradeable.
At 23 years of age Tony Parker has been a starting NBA point guard for four seasons and has been a significant part of two NBA championship runs.
Is he untouchable? yes.
Parker's job isn't to make his team-mates better, he isn't the rock that glues the Spurs together--that's Tim Duncan. Guys like Kidd and Nash are the leaders of their respective teams.
If by making players better you are referring to Parker's assists, well he upped his regular season average to 6.5 assists or something, which is pretty darn good considering Spurs are built on motion offense and dumping the ball TD in the center.
Parker DOES make his team-mates better. He gives Manu Ginobili a great complementary teammate in the backcourt--with both able to lead fast breaks and increase the tempo. He makes guys like Bowen, Barry, and Co. get wide open for 3 pointers with his penetrations, AND he would make Nazr better if he quit fumbling the passes so much.
No one thinks Parker is untouchable. We are just saying that Parker is a great fit for the Spurs, has a lot of upside potential, and that there really isn't anybody out there who is available OR who we would trade for that would make the Spurs better than they already are. Nash and Billups are not FA.
No one is untouchable if moving them makes the team better. Personally I don't see the realistic or feasible deal that would make the Spurs better by moving Parker.
Marbury!? might as well get Gilbert Arenas for parker. Actually, Arenas would be an improvement over Parker. Better defender/shooter/passer. Problem is he is too much of a ballhog.I've been asking them that question for weeks. Still haven't heard an answer. The only name that came up was Marbury
Duncan would be happy 'cause he would have another Playstation buddy with Arenas.
Some of you people don't seem to realise hopw difficult our system is to learn. Playing point guard is about distrubuting, scoring and keeping the team on track. Parker manages top do the last of those 2 well and sometimes even busts out the first, elevating him to a top tier point guard level. Consistency will be the key, can he ever find it?
Lets take Brent Barry as an example to why Parker is untouchable... Brent is a nba vet whose seen it all and whose basketball IQ and offensive awareness if off the charts. Yet he struggled with the new system and it was only late in the season that he was truly able to run the offense (even playing 2 guard he would set the offense occasionly later in the season) well.
Parker at 23 can handle this system with ease, its like second nature to him now. You change the point guard it will take them a year at minimum to be able to run it as efficiently as Brent Barry let alone Tony Parker. That as MB eluded to is one year of Tim and Manus prime that may be sacrificed to the learning curve of an unknown point guard.
Its simply not worth the risk.
Marbury!? might as well get Gilbert Arenas for parker. Actually, Arenas would be an improvement over Parker. Better defender/shooter/passer. Problem is he is too much of a ballhog.
Duncan would be happy 'cause he would have another Playstation buddy with Arenas.
Arenas can't distribute better than Parker on his worst night. He is a horrible playmaker.
You obviously haven't seen Arenas play. He is a much better passer than Parker. Problem is, he doesn't like to pass
If Marbury comes to San Antonio, I will have to stab my eyes out with a spoon so I won't be able to see it.
Sorry, I know you work for them and probably have to back the guy up, but he's put out so many poor articles in the last couple years it's pathetic.This guy is an excellent writer - I have met him and he is a fan of Spurs basketball and their style of play (although his primary team is the Rockets).
In this article, the whole premise is from a "nameless" agent that didn't even say he was talking about Parker. I understand there's a stretch for material in the summer, but that's a big stretch. Also, he's glaringly wrong throughout the article. I could break it all down for you, but here's just some errors:
Parker outscored Manu on the road in the Finals.Faced with the kind of intensity that an NBA Finals MVP brings, Parker all but disappeared for seven games.
Tony only had one turnover in Game 7.In Game Seven we began hoping he would get in foul trouble so he could stop turning the ball over.
He also rips on Tony's defense without mention that only one basket was scored on Tony in the entire game 7.
That all being said, I don't think anyone is exactly untradeable in the NBA. And I'm not saying they would never look to trade Tony. But this article sucks.
And another thing, it's "Derek" Fisher, not "Derrick".
This is just moronic. Tony just turned 23 and as mentioned knows the system like the back of his hand. Billups is the only PG I could see making the Spurs better and even then I'm not sure he would because Tony's speed and ability to penetrate draws defenders into the lane that creat wide open shots for the Bowens, Horrys, and Barrys once the ball is swung cross court (meaning Tony might not get the Assist, but was key in getting the wide open shot).
This article is all based on an assumption. Do you really think the Spurs would trade their 23 year old, Championship experienced PG for a PG in the draft that has never played a day in the NBA? If so, you are clueless how the Pop and RC run things.
Chauncey Billups,I've been asking them that question for weeks. Still haven't heard an answer. The only name that came up was Marbury
ups : one the clutchest performers of the league, good defender , good penetrator, outstanding shooter (specially free throws), avg. 6APG.
downs: 6 years older than tony, untradeable?
READ: NOT A FA. And I highly doubt he's going to leave Detroit anytime soon. It's not like they are not le contenders themselves....
exstatic hit it on the head earlier in this thread. Agents are liars and will say anything to boast their client's stock. But even worse than agents are agents at an NBA draft. They'll go out and get high school kids who are ready to enroll in college and sell them on the dream that if they declare for the draft now, they'll be picked in the first round and be instant millionaires. And then when the kids go undrafted, the agents drop them.
And this is who you get a scoop from?
Amazing stupid.
P.S.
I didn't even bother reading the article. We got a copy of that Swish Magazine or whatever and it was pathetic. The only thing it was good for was to open it up and laugh at the thousands (literally) of typos.
Are you sure that's a basketball magazine?Swish Magazine
Yeah, that's what I was worried about too. I didn't want to open it and see an expose on Vince Carter.
And then Jump back off in GM2 when he goes 6-20 with 7 assists and 6 TO's
Who wrote that? Walton Buys Off Me?
[QUOTE=1Parker1]Parker's job isn't to make his team-mates better, he isn't the rock that glues the Spurs together--that's Tim Duncan. Guys like Kidd and Nash are the leaders of their respective teams.
Steve Nash, I'll give you as a leader...as far as maybe scoring goes...But they both avg more points AND assists then Parker, so I'm going to disagree. Everything runs through Tim Duncan and I do agree with that.
I don't even want to talk about stats to be honest. I'm just saying that Parker hasn't achieved "untouchable" status yet. I think his play in the last two years playoffs cement that opinion. When its comes to playing the "best of the best" I don't think he's established himself as one of them. Is he young? Yes. Can he become A LOT better...Definitely! I am just saying that in the context of the this "string" is about, it would be really easy for him to become a guy who dribbles the ball way to much, and shoots way to often...Which is exactly what Marbury does. This play, in effect doesn't make the players around him better...by getting them more touches, in position to make easy shots etc. I don't think Tony moves the ball well enough as it is, and already dribbles to much. With his quickness and penetration, he should be a lot better at getting guys (BESIDES T.D.) better looks. I don't think he's done that yet.
Last edited by Que Gee; 07-05-2005 at 02:23 PM.
Steve Nash, I'll give you as a leader...as far as maybe scoring goes...But they both avg more points AND assists then Parker, so I'm going to disagree. Everything runs through Tim Duncan and I do agree with that.
I don't even want to talk about stats to be honest. I'm just saying that Parker hasn't achieved "untouchable" status yet. I think his play in the last two years playoffs cement that opinion. When its comes to playing the "best of the best" I don't think he's established himself as one of them. Is he young? Yes. Can he become A LOT better...Definitely! I am just saying that in the context of the this "string" is about, it would be really easy for him to become a guy who dribbles the ball way to much, and shoots way to often...Which is exactly what Marbury does. This play, in effect doesn't make the players around him better...by getting them more touches, in position to make easy shots etc. I don't think Tony moves the ball well enough as it is, and already dribbles to much. With his quickness and penetration, he should be a lot better at getting guys (BESIDES T.D.) better looks. I don't think he's done that yet.
not me. But the trade is not gonna happen. I hope.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
