Sign the Pe ion: Keep Tony Parker

[cantthinkofanything]

Those people framing TP as a "speed only" player are just flat-out wrong. When Parker came into the league he was that player. But, he developed a reliable mid-range jumpshot and teardrop floater for himself and became much more adept at making the right pass/finding open players.

Yes, most of his success to this point has been predicated on speed. But, as a player he has shown the motivation and capability to improve. I see no reason why Parker can't continue to develop and shift his game as he ages and loses speed.

I also think it's overreaction to talk about a player losing speed when he's just 28yrs old. Last year he dealt with a myriad of nagging injuries that severely hampered his effectiveness. I doubt something like that happens in the future.

Even if all of the above were true, he still needs to be traded if FO believes he is gone after this year.

[AFBlue]

I get that, but there's no denying that there's a good chance the spurs might be trying to shop Parker. I'm not hoping that they just rid themselves of Parker. I'm hoping that there's a deal out there that will make the spurs BETTER.
That's what im hoping for.

But i'm getting tired of Parker lovers who immediately dismiss the idea of trading him.

I'm pretty sure this isn't directed at me, since I said I'm not against a TP trade that makes this team better.

Shopping him only makes sense as he is the trade asset with the best value...and even TP has said as much. That doesn't mean the Spurs will actually trade, unless they get an offer that keeps them relevant in the short-term and helps build them up in the long-term.

I just don't see many of those deals floating out there right now.

[xapatan2]

Hmm, the fact that Hill kept the starting job at PG only proves it.
Parker dribbling the ball for 20 secs and dancing around or Hill moving the ball? Hmm I think I'll go with the younger guy.

Goes to show how much of a Parker lover you are when its obvious to see how many good guards there are in the league. I could name at least 5 guards better or just as good as Parker.
I'll even stretch to 10.

To me, it wasn't much of a coincidence to see the spurs playing better at the end of the season when Parker got hurt..

I don't see things the same way. The starting job for Hill is directly linked with Manu starting, nothing else.

Call me a parker lover, a manu lover, a bruce lover or whatever, Parker is the PG thats fits to our offense system, plain simple. 5 guards with his balls, his money time play, his FG% and his agressivity ?? I don't buy it.

Sure it was'nt a coincidence the spurs play better : It had been YEARS that Manu did not had this level of play. And Hill is good SG, a very very good one.
Xap'

[AFBlue]

Even if all of the above were true, he still needs to be traded if FO believes he is gone after this year.

In my earlier post I said that one of the conditions for Parker to be traded is if he publicly makes a request for it. Outside of that, I think the Spurs have a realistic chance to re-sign him, because he's said as many great things about SA being his "home base" as he has about an opportunity to play elsewhere.

Anything less concrete than a formal request and I DON'T think the Spurs try to move him for less than a great package.

[rayray2k8]

I don't see things the same way. The starting job for Hill is directly linked with Manu starting, nothing else.

Call me a parker lover, a manu lover, a bruce lover or whatever, Parker is the PG thats fits to our offense system, plain simple. 5 guards with his balls, his money time play, his FG% and his agressivity ?? I don't buy it.

Sure it was'nt a coincidence the spurs play better : It had been YEARS that Manu did not had this level of play. And Hill is good SG, a very very good one.
Xap'

It was money time bro.

[rayray2k8]

Don't get me wrong, my true hate lies within the red haired girl, but shopping Parker is not a bad idea.
I think Timvp said it awhile back. Trading Jefferson for TE is brilliant. Trading Parker for a TE is ing stupid.
Parker's value is very high, there is a difference. Just trying to avoid having the spurs walk empty handed out of this one.

[Brazil]

tony parker is a one trick pony. once he loses his speed he'll be an average nba point guard. trade him now while he still has value.

Once again I'm not against trading him if it's for the right pieces. Apparently Spurs FO hasn't found the adequate deal, fortunately for us you are not Spurs FO cauz reading your clever posts, I'm sure you would have traded him for haywood and kidd.

For the rest why do you care about him loosing his speed ? After Tim retirement spurs will be in rebuilding mode anyway, what we need is one or two more year of TP full speed.

[xapatan2]

It was money time bro.

sure, I just believe Manu can be like that again this year, with tony and tim in perfect condition as well.

Maybe I am wrong, but I do not see the realistic trade that could make the spurs better with Parker in the shopping bag.

Xap'

[cantthinkofanything]

In my earlier post I said that one of the conditions for Parker to be traded is if he publicly makes a request for it. Outside of that, I think the Spurs have a realistic chance to re-sign him, because he's said as many great things about SA being his "home base" as he has about an opportunity to play elsewhere.

Anything less concrete than a formal request and I DON'T think the Spurs try to move him for less than a great package.

Sorry, I missed the earlier post. But do you think the Spurs are willing or should be willing to pay TP max $? Will Tony accept less than max $?
From his comments, it sounds like he is about 50/50 on even wanting to stay.

[xapatan2]

Don't get me wrong, my true hate lies within the red haired girl, but shopping Parker is not a bad idea.
I think Timvp said it awhile back. Trading Jefferson for TE is brilliant. Trading Parker for a TE is ing stupid.
Parker's value is very high, there is a difference. Just trying to avoid having the spurs walk empty handed out of this one.

I am OK with this. I think the same. But Parker is not the type of person like that. He wants to stay. THe rest is negociations. And my instinct tells me he's not looking for the max.

Xap'

[Blackjack]

Admittedly, I ain't seen a real pe ion in a long while ... but I remembered them looking a bit different.

Procedural change?

[VivaPopovich]

there have been a lot of good posts here so far, i just wish we could take out the hostility. a lot of good ideas but you have to put up with insults to get them lol

it's not about unconditional loyalty to Tony Parker. i like George Hill better than Tony Parker, and even in TP's young prime i had always considered Manu Ginobili as being more valuable to the team

this is about the tendency of the Spurs, Coach Pop, and the fans to get into this constant, "let's build for the future" mode. it's apparent when Pop has Tim, Manu, Tony sit out games, causing us to lose games, so they can be freshened up for the next game.

it's about Coach Pop taking out tony/ timmy/manu when we're down by 15 when there is still well over a lot of time left to make a run in the game. it's about the ultra-high expectations Spurs fans have suddenly developed, where things have become a championship arms race with the Lakers, and anything short of the Spurs in their prime glory days is a failure

i have tremendous respect for Jerry Sloan, and Coach Pop does too.

Sloan is a man that takes things game at a time. play tough defense, score points in the paint, pass the ball, rebound, and we'll be fine. and that got the Jazz to the playoffs every season. what's wrong with making playoffs every season?

they did have a similar situation with Carlos Boozer, and I'm sure Sloan exerted his influence to keep him because he knew that Boozer was best for the team for the moment

to get to the future you first have to get through the moment, is what i'm saying

[Brazil]

I am OK with this. I think the same. But Parker is not the type of person like that. He wants to stay. THe rest is negociations. And my instinct tells me he's not looking for the max.

Xap'

Since a long time now I feel that TP would be ok for a 70 - 80 / 5 contract but after seeing the craziness of 2010 FA, I'm not so sure

[VivaPopovich]

Admittedly, I ain't seen a real pe ion in a long while ... but I remembered them looking a bit different.

Procedural change?

http://www.nba.com/spurs/contact/club_directory.html

just fill out the form, it'll be easier

[Sigz]

If he dunks more like he did against the Rockets, he can stay.

[Blackjack]

'Preciate it. Can't support it, but I 'preciate it -- I'm fine with Parker being dealt for the right deal, I just don't see one out there at the moment.

[JustinJDW]

Signed.

Only an idiot would think we should trade Tony Parker. He is our only player that can score when he wants and can score for all 82 Games of the Season and into the Playoffs. He is the best scoring PG in the League.

We put too much on George Hill. He had one awesome Season and now we want to trade our best scorer? Psh.

Start TP and Hill, and have Ginobili come off the Bench.

[IceColdBrewski]

http://www.nba.com/spurs/contact/club_directory.html

just fill out the form, it'll be easier

Done.

Except my comments were more along the lines of trading Tony instead of letting him walk for nothing. I encourage other like-minded fans to do the same.

Thanks for the link bud.

[xapatan2]

Not that Parker didn't help out a lot, we still would have won rings with Kidd.

Frankly, i don't thing so.

with Timmy and Manu in perfect shape together, our offense has never been based on assisted FG's.

Kidd would have never brought to the table the shots, points and money time plays Parker brought in 05 and 07. Nash would have. But Kidd no.

Xap'

[xapatan2]

Done.

Except my comments were more along the lines of trading Tony instead of letting him walk for nothing. I encourage other like-minded fans to do the same.

Thanks for the link bud.

Classic IceColdBrewsky stuff, man you didn't change a lot since the old days of summer 03...

glad you're not part of the FO

Xap'

[cantthinkofanything]

Frankly, i don't thing so.

with Timmy and Manu in perfect shape together, our offense has never been based on assisted FG's.

Agreed. But I believe they still would have prospered with a Kidd run offense.

Kidd would have never brought to the table the shots, points and money time plays Parker brought in 05 and 07. Nash would have. But Kidd no.

No but Kidd would have set up shots and points. I'm not saying the Spurs would be definitively better with Kidd than Parker but I don't think you can say they would definitely not have won any rings.

[Mr.Robinson]

When Parker went down the Spurs beat the elite teams in the league. Jefferson and Manu were playing great. Parker dribbles for 20 seconds then passes to a player when it is too late. Parker. Trade him for a solid player and the Spurs do better. It doesn't have to be a star. Parker is like Iverson but slower and not as good.

[Brazil]

When Parker went down the Spurs beat the elite teams in the league. Jefferson and Manu were playing great. Parker dribbles for 20 seconds then passes to a player when it is too late. Parker. Trade him for a solid player and the Spurs do better. It doesn't have to be a star. Parker is like Iverson but slower and not as good.

/thread.

[SpursTillTheEnd]

robinson has a point paker ing takes 20 seconds to pass, when manu and hill are in goes way smoother

[Obstructed_View]

I didn't expect that from a guy with so many posts!!

You REALLY think they went over the luxury tax BECAUSE of Tony's comments or to "satisfy" him????!!

We all know that Tony is cold/honest when he speaks, but he just said in public what EVERYBODY was thinking! (fans, FO, Timmy, Manu...)
It was a no brainner we needed an upgrade to have a shot...

Tony didn't choose RJ ... and his contract!

I wish I could say I didn't expect the above response from people with that flag under their name. Try to separate what I'm saying from the people who are suggesting that Parker isn't a good player and let's go from there.

Parker complained publicly that the team needed more help, and it was perfectly obvious at the time that the Spurs responded to it because they wanted to show a commitment to Parker that they were willing to do what was required to help the team win so that he wouldn't leave.

"EVERYBODY" has been thinking the same thing for the previous 20 years that the Spurs wouldn't spend money; it took Parker's veiled threat to get them to do it. Once the Spurs did that, not only did Parker completely fail to show up after a lot of time off, he then suggested that he wouldn't even entertain the idea of an extension.

He's likely to play really well this season since he'll be playing for himself instead of the team he asked to open their pursestrings, but unless that play is enough to win the Spurs a le, they need to get value for him before he bails.