return of parker at san antonio

[ehz33satx]

Ok maybe I am over reacting and I apologize for that.

[temujin]

I don't see any stupidity in here.

In fact, all this is very instructive.

Talking business, where was Mr. Parker before 19?
Whose investment was he?
Did the people that invest money in him get any return?
Basketball being a team sport, who payed for Parker's teammate, just to provide a team whre he could shine and be noticed?
Who payed the coaches, doctors, salaries and the rest of the crew?

Explain to me, please, how any NBA team is putting money to raise and grow the next Tony Parker. Or Dirk Novitzki, or the Milicics or Ginobilis.

Look, guys, the next Parker is 12, right now. He might be in need of some education, health care etch.
Pricy stuff.

There are 1000 of them, actually.

Only one will make it.

How do you know the 999 to drop?

You wouldn't waste any pro money on anybody bound to failure, will you?

Please, tell me how any NBA team KNOWS who exactly that 12 years old is.

They don't.
They let the school system in the US, and PRIVATELY owned teams in the national systems of rest of the world do the job.
All they ask is get back their GOOD PRODUCTS every other year or so.

I think it's a fair deal.

[ArgSpursFan]

I say Parker should play for France.NO questions about it.
But,Do the spurs have the right to take a look at that ancle too?'?? yes.Plus knowing that the spurs are not gonna improve on the roster this off season,they´ll will want Duncan,Parker,Manu and Bowen 110% phisically this coming season.
I would think the same if it was Manu or Oberto who were injuried.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I've never been a big poster & would have prefer not to post about the french NT but I can't help when reading those comments...

You have to understand that in Europe (in reality everywhere except the US)it's really important to play for your country. We have the same issue with football team not wanting their star players to participate. But all players want to represent their countries. Not only because of patriotism (I don't see it at really strong in the majority of european countries) but mainly because it's where we can make the biggest match, have the biggest emotion...

As a french, I'm not really keen to sing our national hymn, but when France won the football world cup, I was like crying in front of my TV...

And not to forget that the players know each other for long time, playing in junior together...

The main arguments here are mainly: we pay so we have all the rights to do so. I can't really argue with this but to play with your national team is not a question of money but more of proudness...

I must admit that I'm not totally clear because it's hard to express those feelings, especially for someone like me who is not a big patriot (I can't stand blind thinking & simply obey to the order). But believe me, it's important for all players to represent their countries, even if there is risk on top of that...

Last point: a lot of players beneficiate from playing with their NT. They get experience & compete with high caliber player. Do you really think TP would be that good without having played for the French national team? Don't you think as well that it's normal when you have benefitiated from the national funds (INSEP - National sport ins ute) to give something back...

If you stick to your opinion, fine, but don't complain to see the best sportsmen in the US not playing for their country...

Dude, we all get that playing on the national team is important. Please excuse the idiots who don't understand.

At the same time, you and the other French people on this thread need to knock off the outrage about him coming back here for treatment.

He's a 70 million dollar investment for the Spurs, they are the ones on the hook for the tab for his medical bills (not team France), and as such they should (and do) have the right to determine where he gets treatment.

Quit with the Euro inferiority complex/snobby American crap and look at it from a business perspective, because as much as you don't like it, that's the context in which the decision to bring him back here for treatment was made.

[JPB]

I don't see any stupidity in here.

In fact, all this is very instructive.

Talking business, where was Mr. Parker before 19?
Whose investment was he?
Did the people that invest money in him get any return?
Basketball being a team sport, who payed for Parker's teammate, just to provide a team whre he could shine and be noticed?
Who payed the coaches, doctors, salaries and the rest of the crew?

Explain to me, please, how any NBA team is putting money to raise and grow the next Tony Parker. Or Dirk Novitzki, or the Milicics or Ginobilis.

Look, guys, the next Parker is 12, right now. He might be in need of some education, health care etch.
Pricy stuff.

There are 1000 of them, actually.

Only one will make it.

How do you know the 999 to drop?

You wouldn't waste any pro money on anybody bound to failure, will you?

Please, tell me how any NBA team KNOWS who exactly that 12 years old is.

They don't.
They let the school system in the US, and PRIVATELY owned teams in the national systems of rest of the world do the job.
All they ask is get back their GOOD PRODUCTS every other year or so.

I think it's a fair deal.

Yes.

That's a major difference between US sport and many other countries sport. In basketball, soccer or other disciplines in Europe or south america..., teams have young sections were they developp young promising players. Some of them will become pro, some won't (they all receive education anyway in the process).
It's the only source of players and it represents a significant cost, specially if you consider only a minority will be valuable players.


In the US, you have college sports in wich pro teams can choose through drafts. They don't spend any money developping players before they became pro.

It's hard to define who's more owning to the other. Should TP not have benificiated from the federal center, would have he been the player he is ? Would have he made the NBA and help Spurs get 3 les ? Maybe, maybe not...

On the other side, would he not have played for the spurs, would he be the player he is now, a player who can lift french NT and help developping basketball in France ? Maybe, maybe not.

It's a game of give and take and gra ude. I think it's a good think that TP with all his successes still wants to play for his country. Everybody should approve that.

And yes, he could get injured in many other situations during summer.

[Slomo]

Yes.

That's a major difference between US sport and many other countries sport. In basketball, soccer or other disciplines in Europe or south america..., teams have young sections were they developp young promising players. Some of them will become pro, some won't (they all receive education anyway in the process).
It's the only source of players and it represents a significant cost, specially if you consider only a minority will be valuable players.


In the US, you have college sports in wich pro teams can choose through drafts. They don't spend any money developping players before they became pro.

It's hard to define who's more owning to the other. Should TP not have benificiated from the federal center, would have he been the player he is ? Would have he made the NBA and help Spurs get 3 les ? Maybe, maybe not...

On the other side, would he not have played for the spurs, would he be the player he is now, a player who can lift french NT and help developping basketball in France ? Maybe, maybe not.

It's a game of give and take and gra ude. I think it's a good think that TP with all his successes still wants to play for his country. Everybody should approve that.

And yes, he could get injured in many other situations during summer.

This is a very good post.

TP is who he is because of the investment of the French Basketball/Athletic program first and a product of the Spurs system second for the very simple reason that he would never have been drafted without the first part.

To those of you who argue the whole thing through money only, I say have a look at how much countries invest in young athletes in order to produce/discover talents like TP. The Spurs have it easy they have the luxury to invest in a proven product.

Oh and btw, the only return on the French athletic programs' investment is their athletes playing for the NT. I hope we can all agree that the Spurs' return on investment is much better. FIBA or the national association or even the club they are playing for do not receive a dime in return when their players decide to go play in the NBA - I don't really care for this but can understand the frustration of some teams to lose an assets they have nurtured for years (without any strings attached I may add).

As for the recent medical situation, I believe their are some other good options that could be used, but the current one is also not bad - I would gladly agree to commute to SA every week for work, if I was guaranteed a business class ticket - First class is a lot more comfortable so I'm sure TP will be fine

[temujin]

Dude, we all get that playing on the national team is important. Please excuse the idiots who don't understand.

At the same time, you and the other French people

Thank you for the french.
I am not.
Unfortunately.

on this thread need to knock off the outrage about him coming back here for treatment.

He's a 70 million dollar investment for the Spurs, they are the ones on the hook for the tab for his medical bills (not team France), and as such they should (and do) have the right to determine where he gets treatment.

Quit with the Euro inferiority complex/snobby American crap and look at it from a business perspective, because as much as you don't like it, that's the context in which the decision to bring him back here for treatment was made.

Read Slomo and JPB.

They got it.

[timvp]

This thread has some extreme takes on each side. I think the truth lies more in the middle.

First of all, if the Spurs really wanted to they could send their doctors/trainers to France and they could have given Parker the same diagnoses and treatment. The US doesn't have any secret sprained ankle machines or anything. And France is far from a backwoods country.

Why don't the Spurs do that? Probably a combination of things. It'd probably cost more to send a doctor and a trainer there than to bring Parker here. The Spurs probably want to avoid having the French doctors looking over their shoulder while the French coach whispers to Parker that he's off the team if he doesn't play. Removing Parker from the situation is the cheaper and easier option. But as far as what makes the most sense, I'd agree that it'd make the most sense in the broad picture send the medical personnel to France. It'd make even more sense to send someone with Parker from the beginning to make sure he treats his injuries properly.

As far as the Spurs making Parker, that's BS. Parker was already damn good when he got to San Antonio. That'd be like saying Argentina didn't have a hand in producing Manu. These two guys are products of their respective country. France's youth basketball programs are even better than the youth programs in the US. The US is trying to catch up and uses France as one of the top models. Argentina is another example of a country who knows how to develop young players. Without the French youth basketball program, there'd be no Parker. Without Parker, there'd be none of the last three championships. So an American trying to be arrogant in this regard is pretty lame.

I also agree that the countries that develop these players get screwed when they get so good that their pro teams don't want them to play for their country. Do you think France spent money on Parker so that he could go to the US and forget all about them? Where I start to differ on this point is when people start blaming the Spurs for decisions regarding these players.

Manu and Oberto could have played with their NT if they wanted to. The Spurs advised them against it but there's nothing holding them back. And really, I don't think those two guys wanted to. Even if Argentina doesn't qualify this summer, there are other times and ways to qualify and they are almost a lock to qualify one way or another. But it make sense for when the Argentina media asks Manu or Oberto why they aren't playing, instead of telling them that they don't want to -- it's easier to just say the Spurs said no. When the truth is they could play if they really wanted to. Oberto was a free agent. He could have just played and then signed ... or gone to another team that would have no problem with him playing.

And that leads me to a thought about the Parker situation that I haven't seen anyone bring up. Doesn't anyone think that Parker could be behind his trip back to the US? I think it's entirely possible. Sure he loves his NT but no pro player likes playing in these meaningless preseason games and their pseudo training camps. By flying back to the US, Parker doesn't have to go to the two-a-days and can skip the boring part until it becomes closer to the time the real games begin. To think that Parker was a helpless pawn in this is underestimating Parker.

And as far as I remember, Finger-Gate happened differently than I'm reading in this thread. Parker hurt his finger. The French diagnosed it as a jammed finger. Then as a sprain. And then when the Spurs found out that there was actually a break in the finger and the French wanted him to play anyways, they got pissed. The French wanted him to put a splint on it and play. The Spurs said, and rightly so, that if Parker re-injures the finger, a three week injury could turn into a three month injury.

I really think the Spurs are fine with Parker playing for his NT. They just want to make sure he's being treated correctly, especially after last summer's Finger-Gate. That said, the Spurs could be more proactive as far as sending some personnel with Parker to make sure he's being treated properly for any medical conditions that may arise. They had a trainer staying with Mahinmi last year. I'm sure the bus ride over to Paris wouldn't have cost too much.

[ShoogarBear]

First of all, if the Spurs really wanted to they could send their doctors/trainers to France and they could have given Parker the same diagnoses and treatment. The US doesn't have any secret sprained ankle machines or anything. And France is far from a backwoods country.

Why don't the Spurs do that? Probably a combination of things. It'd probably cost more to send a doctor and a trainer there than to bring Parker here. The Spurs probably want to avoid having the French doctors looking over their shoulder while the French coach whispers to Parker that he's off the team if he doesn't play. Removing Parker from the situation is the cheaper and easier option. But as far as what makes the most sense, I'd agree that it'd make the most sense in the broad picture send the medical personnel to France. It'd make even more sense to send someone with Parker from the beginning to make sure he treats his injuries properly.

I doubt that the Spurs have a physican whose full-time job is to just cover the Spurs. They are orthopedic surgeons with practices who see a lot of other patients, whom the Spurs have contracted with. As such, they can't just close up shop and fly out to France on for a non-emergency.

Also, it's unlikely that they have licenses to practice in France, so any test they want to make or treatments they'd wnat to give would have to be done by a licensed French physician.

[waly.mg]

The same thing again:

Bowen can play for USA
But not the internationals for they countries

[ducks]

The same thing again:

Bowen can play for USA
But not the internationals for they countries

bowen is not playing this summer

[phxspurfan]

The same thing again:

Bowen can play for USA
But not the internationals for they countries

Bowen would have been cut from Team USA anyway. Everyone knows they asked him to feign like they wanted a non-high-flying-big-dunking-showboating-grandstanding-i-wont-play-defense-because-im-too-good-for-it-and-should-be-on-the-and-1-mixtape-and-make-rap-videos-and-thusly-sell-overpriced-shoes star. Bowen is USA's practice b*tch. That's all.

Duncan, on the other hand, when asked to play for USA, had Pop sitting on the sidelines, watching his minutes like a hawk and pulling him as early as possible in every summer game.

[timvp]

I doubt that the Spurs have a physican whose full-time job is to just cover the Spurs. They are orthopedic surgeons with practices who see a lot of other patients, whom the Spurs have contracted with. As such, they can't just close up shop and fly out to France on for a non-emergency.

Exactly.

Unless they were paid a nice amount of money to do so.

Also, it's unlikely that they have licenses to practice in France, so any test they want to make or treatments they'd wnat to give would have to be done by a licensed French physician.

A US doctor can't treat someone who lives in the US if they are on foreign soil? Interesting.

But even so, I'm sure they can monitor the taking of the x-rays and MRIs and can help interpret the results. And treatments for an ankle sprain I assume can be administered even by a foreigner. Like ice, heat, massage and the such. But it's possible that I am wrong and they'd be forced to hire a French trainer to do the dirty work.

[SpursWoman]

I doubt that the Spurs have a physican whose full-time job is to just cover the Spurs. They are orthopedic surgeons with practices who see a lot of other patients,

I see Dr. Saenz ... he's awesome.

[ShoogarBear]

Exactly.

Unless they were paid a nice amount of money to do so.

If you paid a physician $1M a year just to take care of the Spurs, you'd end up with a wealthy doctor out of practice. These guys need to see hundreds of cases per year to stay on their game. I wouldn't want to be taken care of by somebody who only saw 10-20 injuries a year.

Here's something I didn't know about until a few years ago: there's a neurosurgeon who's one of the team MD's for an NFL team. The team is much richer than the Spurs and obviously the NFL injury rate is much higher.

How much does he get as a retainer from the NFL team? Nothing. In fact, he pays them a fee to be able to say he's a team doctor. (He does get paid when he actually has to take care of somebody.) Not only that, he doesn't even live in the same city as the team. Every Sunday, he flies halfway across the country to walk the sidelines.

Obviously, it increases his profile and generates business for him to be able to say he's a team doctor for an NFL team. I don't know if this is specific to this one team or if it's true for all NFL teams or pro sports in general.

A US doctor can't treat someone who lives in the US if they are on foreign soil? Interesting.

Depends on the country. You can probably go to many underdeveloped countries and practice with little or perfunctory paperwork. But I'm pretty sure Europe's regulations are similar to ours; you need to be licensed by the appropriate state agency, which may require additional examinations unless there's some kind of reciprocity agreement. Similarly, a doc from the Europe or even Canada can't just come here and hang up a shingle.

The one exception may be if you're in an embassy, but even then you need to have some kind of State Department clearance.

Now, when the whole U.S. team travels, I'm sure they have a doc who goes with them to oversee things, but they can only perform consultative services.

But even so, I'm sure they can monitor the taking of the x-rays and MRIs and can help interpret the results.

Sure, although with digital technology, that can all be done remotely.

And treatments for an ankle sprain I assume can be administered even by a foreigner. Like ice, heat, massage and the such. But it's possible that I am wrong and they'd be forced to hire a French trainer to do the dirty work.

I'm almost 100% sure trainers have much fewer restrictions, since I've never heard of a team having to use other countries' trainers when they travel. They may have to get clearances in order to perform injections.

[Slomo]

Shoog,

Your explanation about the availability of the physician being part of the decision process in this case makes a lot of sense (and some of the other points too).

The part that I don't like is your presumption of legal/administrative restrictions for an US doctor to examine his/her patient abroad (which doesn't mean it's not true). In my opinion even supervising his/her patient's treatment shouldn't be a problem. At the same time I will admit I have no idea how these things work in real life.

Just a thought. Wouldn't something like that become the patient's decision. In all modern medical system the patient has the ultimate approval/decision right regarding his/her treatment. So could it apply in a situation like this or are the patient's choices limited to the locally certified medical staff? (do I even make sense?)

[Admidave50]

Way too much drama about this!

I'm pretty sure that if you travel 4 hours (go and back) by bus+train+subway, fighting for a seat, to go to your office that it will be more tiring than flying in 1st class and follow your personal driver...

[ShoogarBear]

Shoog,

Your explanation about the availability of the physician being part of the decision process in this case makes a lot of sense (and some of the other points too).

The part that I don't like is your presumption of legal/administrative restrictions for an US doctor to examine his/her patient abroad (which doesn't mean it's not true). In my opinion even supervising his/her patient's treatment shouldn't be a problem. At the same time I will admit I have no idea how these things work in real life.

Just a thought. Wouldn't something like that become the patient's decision. In all modern medical system the patient has the ultimate approval/decision right regarding his/her treatment. So could it apply in a situation like this or are the patient's choices limited to the locally certified medical staff? (do I even make sense?)

It has nothing to do with a doctor being able to examine the patient and render an opinion. That's up to the patient.

But a US doctor wouldn't have the authority to get things done like order an X-Ray or MRI or blood tests. S/he'd have to have a French (in this case) physician do it. Also the US doc couldn't prescribe medications (maybe they could if they brought them along with them, would depend on the regulations) or do any procedures without a license. What would happen is the French doc would ask the US doc for an expert opinion (i.e., a consultation) and work in collaboration with them, but the "official" doc would be the person with the license (i.e.,the French one).

One other administrative thing: I doubt the US doc could bill for his services in a country where he doesn't have a license in the standard fashion. So his fees would have to be covered by a contract or some sort of pre-arrangement. Or he could work for free.

For instances like when they fly in some renowned specialist to perform the separation of conjoined twins, what must happen is the State Department works out the licensing issues with the country in question so that the surgeon is legally covered to perform the operation.

[urunobili]

This thread has some extreme takes on each side. I think the truth lies more in the middle.

First of all, if the Spurs really wanted to they could send their doctors/trainers to France and they could have given Parker the same diagnoses and treatment. The US doesn't have any secret sprained ankle machines or anything. And France is far from a backwoods country.

Why don't the Spurs do that? Probably a combination of things. It'd probably cost more to send a doctor and a trainer there than to bring Parker here. The Spurs probably want to avoid having the French doctors looking over their shoulder while the French coach whispers to Parker that he's off the team if he doesn't play. Removing Parker from the situation is the cheaper and easier option. But as far as what makes the most sense, I'd agree that it'd make the most sense in the broad picture send the medical personnel to France. It'd make even more sense to send someone with Parker from the beginning to make sure he treats his injuries properly.

As far as the Spurs making Parker, that's BS. Parker was already damn good when he got to San Antonio. That'd be like saying Argentina didn't have a hand in producing Manu. These two guys are products of their respective country. France's youth basketball programs are even better than the youth programs in the US. The US is trying to catch up and uses France as one of the top models. Argentina is another example of a country who knows how to develop young players. Without the French youth basketball program, there'd be no Parker. Without Parker, there'd be none of the last three championships. So an American trying to be arrogant in this regard is pretty lame.

I also agree that the countries that develop these players get screwed when they get so good that their pro teams don't want them to play for their country. Do you think France spent money on Parker so that he could go to the US and forget all about them? Where I start to differ on this point is when people start blaming the Spurs for decisions regarding these players.

Manu and Oberto could have played with their NT if they wanted to. The Spurs advised them against it but there's nothing holding them back. And really, I don't think those two guys wanted to. Even if Argentina doesn't qualify this summer, there are other times and ways to qualify and they are almost a lock to qualify one way or another. But it make sense for when the Argentina media asks Manu or Oberto why they aren't playing, instead of telling them that they don't want to -- it's easier to just say the Spurs said no. When the truth is they could play if they really wanted to. Oberto was a free agent. He could have just played and then signed ... or gone to another team that would have no problem with him playing.

And that leads me to a thought about the Parker situation that I haven't seen anyone bring up. Doesn't anyone think that Parker could be behind his trip back to the US? I think it's entirely possible. Sure he loves his NT but no pro player likes playing in these meaningless preseason games and their pseudo training camps. By flying back to the US, Parker doesn't have to go to the two-a-days and can skip the boring part until it becomes closer to the time the real games begin. To think that Parker was a helpless pawn in this is underestimating Parker.

And as far as I remember, Finger-Gate happened differently than I'm reading in this thread. Parker hurt his finger. The French diagnosed it as a jammed finger. Then as a sprain. And then when the Spurs found out that there was actually a break in the finger and the French wanted him to play anyways, they got pissed. The French wanted him to put a splint on it and play. The Spurs said, and rightly so, that if Parker re-injures the finger, a three week injury could turn into a three month injury.

I really think the Spurs are fine with Parker playing for his NT. They just want to make sure he's being treated correctly, especially after last summer's Finger-Gate. That said, the Spurs could be more proactive as far as sending some personnel with Parker to make sure he's being treated properly for any medical conditions that may arise. They had a trainer staying with Mahinmi last year. I'm sure the bus ride over to Paris wouldn't have cost too much.

i totally agree buddy...

[ploto]

The Raptors trainer is in Spain with their national team and Garbajosa.

[ducks]

so canada is not the usa

[picnroll]

This is a very good post.

TP is who he is because of the investment of the French Basketball/Athletic program first and a product of the Spurs system second for the very simple reason that he would never have been drafted without the first part.

To those of you who argue the whole thing through money only, I say have a look at how much countries invest in young athletes in order to produce/discover talents like TP. The Spurs have it easy they have the luxury to invest in a proven product.

Oh and btw, the only return on the French athletic programs' investment is their athletes playing for the NT. I hope we can all agree that the Spurs' return on investment is much better. FIBA or the national association or even the club they are playing for do not receive a dime in return when their players decide to go play in the NBA - I don't really care for this but can understand the frustration of some teams to lose an assets they have nurtured for years (without any strings attached I may add).

How did LeBron, KG, Dwight Howard, Kobe make it without an Insep? Don't some of these European teams have junior club?. Isn't that the way futbol works? Why is the state developing basketball players to begin with? How much does it cost to run an Insep when you subtract out the built in educational costs? I'm willing to bet this cost is greatly exagerrated and no more than one of the private acadmeys some of these high school players attend for free in the US. I'm just not buying the "but look how much was invested in them" line.

[TMTTRIO]

Do you think if he didn't play for NT, he'd be sitting home in a glass cage waiting til his next official time playing for the Spurs?

No, he'd be playing basketball SOMEWHERE. Pro basketball players don't just sit in the offseason, they play basketball.

So, he'd be just as likely to sprain an ankle playing for France as he would playing in a charity tournament, a pickup game, an offseason league or camp (there's 60 NBA players playing in Tim Grgurich's camp in Vegas right now - should they be banned from playing there too? .. it's not NBA sanctioned), or at the Spurs practice facility.

I agree. I also remember Pop saying something about how it's good compe ion and they would be playing anyways in some kind of game. Hey even Manu is back to playing again (even though he's supposed to be resting )http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhT8Za4JRAM. I know we don't like it but injuries can happen anytime. It can also happen if they rest too much without playing. Look at last year when Manu had the whole summer off. He was injured the whole year. I just hope this year will be different. By the way I'm not worried. Tony's strong and will be better by the time the season starts.

[mathbzh]

I read on here that basketball is a minor sport in France. SO why are all you frenchies all up in arms over having Parker play there every year.

Do you realize that you are on a Spurs forum ? All frenchies posting here are basketball fans.

[OM_fever]

Dude, we all get that playing on the national team is important. Please excuse the idiots who don't understand.

At the same time, you and the other French people on this thread need to knock off the outrage about him coming back here for treatment.

He's a 70 million dollar investment for the Spurs, they are the ones on the hook for the tab for his medical bills (not team France), and as such they should (and do) have the right to determine where he gets treatment.

Quit with the Euro inferiority complex/snobby American crap and look at it from a business perspective, because as much as you don't like it, that's the context in which the decision to bring him back here for treatment was made.

Sorry but you miss my point here. Saying that the Spurs don't have the right to check out Parker is wrong. I do understand that they invet in him & want to make sure that he is fine. I'm just perplex with that long trip for that... it's my only argument.

After I've got more concern with your last sentence. Where did you read in my post that I get any inferiority complex??? Get your fantasm for you please & read really what I posted. I am just amazed to read that many comments on: "don't play for your national team!". It sounds strange to me. I do like the Spurs, I root for them since DRob days but I love international compe ion. It's really particular events & I would always remember the dream team days too. Right now I can't understand that the US didn't give a to play for their countries, fortunatly the last defeats change some state of mind & we will see futur great games with Argentina, US, Greece, Spain, France, Serbia,...

And please to all posters, stop your y comments on cheese & all caricatur. It's really an easy thing to do & it's for

Go Spurs