With Tony's departure and Manu's potential retirement, its now time to rank them.

[spurraider21]

There really is not legit argument for Manu over TP in terms of overall contribution.

I challenge anyone to make a compelling case for Manu over TP without using BS arguments like "hero" "faught hard"

Remember 10 years ago? The much heated Manu vs Tony fans debate. That was when both were young..

Now, Manu is potentially at his end and Parker has declined to an extent that he's no longer a top 4 player in this team.

IMO,

pre 2005

Tony>Manu

2004-2007

Manu> Tony

2008-2009

Tony> Manu

2009-2012

Manu > Tony

2013

Tony

2014-2015

Manu..

Damn, I am going to miss the Manu vs tony debates....srs

Clearly though, manu had a bigger impact on the championship years though.

So Manu>Tony

[SpurOutofTownFan]

This isn't very difficult

1. TD
2. Robinson
3. Manu
4. Gervin
5. Parker

Special mention to Bowen, E11iot, Gilmore, Silas, and Leonard

[spurraider21]

Clipper Nation lurking itt

[FkLA]

Not talking about apa, since the is trolling, but I honestly don't see how anyone can think Parker was a better player than Manu. It's obvious Manu made a bigger impact and I'm not just saying that because he is a fellow Mexican. If you had to pick a player that exemplified all-star selections and PPG not always telling the whole picture--Manu would be that player. Prime Manu was a special player. Prime Parker was really really good but I don't think he was in that same class.

[Seventyniner]

WS regular season plus playoffs

244.2 Duncan
196.2 Robinson
127.2 Ginobili
124.0 Parker
117.2 Gervin
69.0 Leonard
60.3 Elliott
60.1 Silas
53.4 Johnson
41.5 Gilmore

Pretty much nails it. Manu was better per minute but Parker was more durable, so these numbers being really close doesn't surprise me at all.

[diego]

Pretty much nails it. Manu was better per minute but Parker was more durable, so these numbers being really close doesn't surprise me at all.

yep, i think the only question is how much of Manu's lesser minutes was because of durability, vs because pop preferred to let manu quarterback the 2nd unit / get the most out of the turkoglu/finley/barry/green types... after all manu performed better as a starter, played big minutes outside of the spurs system, and tony likewise performed worse as a sub..
bottom line though, its not difficult to say who was better even if only slightly, 2005-2011 manu was the spurs closer, even in 14 - 18 manu was the closer for playoff games, the only year tony really had that responsibility was 2012, 2013.. tony not developing a 3pt shot lowered his ceiling

[DAF86]

As basketball players, to me, it's clear that Manu is better. In terms of individual accomplishments with the Spurs, to me, it's also clear that Tony wins the argument.

[rastaspur]

Manu is more effective at 41 than tony at age 35. Ginobili was an underrated defender. You cant say the same about porker.

Manu probably has sacrificied more for the spurs than any other professional athlete. He never cared about his numbers. He cared about winning. Its hard for me to consider that a negative when comparing the two.

Im not saying tony is selfish, but he clearly has never been as selfless as manu.

Manu is the better player imo. The opinion of an unemployed troll will never sway my thought process