# Kirk Hinrich or Tony Parker?



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Who is the better player now? Who would you choose if you had to pick which one will have the better career? 

*Tony Parker:*
15.3 points
5.8 assists
3.7 rebounds
2.7 turnovers
*48.9% FG*
30.7% 3PT
67.2% FT
in 33.3 minutes per game

*Kirk Hinrich:*
*15.9 PPG*
*6.9 APG*
*3.8 RPG*
*2.3 Turnovers*
41% FG
*36.4% 3PT*
*83% FT*
in 36.9 minutes per game

Stats aren't everything, because of situations and systems being different, but who is the better player? Stats don't really capture defense, who is the better defender?


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

I like Kirk Hinrich better mainly because I see him as a better point guard. Tony Parker may be better at individual skills though.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

well, in parker's defense he had a very slow start and we all know what he's capable of. he's been playing much better as of late and he's capable of filling up all categories on the stat sheet.. well except blocks.

that said i like hinrich. i was surprised so many ppl had doubts about him being a great guard in the nba, but i was right. i think i'd still have to go with parker though. parker may be a veteran but he's still young, and improving. he is the fastest player in the league and his potential is actually, imho, greater than hinrich's.


----------



## Debt Collector (Mar 13, 2003)

hinrich right now, parker is too wildly inconsistent


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Hinrich is nice. But I'm a sucker for the flashy frenchman, with his ankle breaking crossovers and teardrops in the lane. When Tony gets it going, he's as entertaining as Manu.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

Parker no doubt. 

Controls the best team in the league.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Will you also post how many minutes each guy plays? Also, Hinrich plays so many more minutes than the other Bulls that his stats are inflated.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Whodinee</b>!
> hinrich right now, parker is too wildly inconsistent


nothing really inconsistent about those stats he's putting up. It's hard to be "wildly inconsistent" and still shoot 48 percent from the field.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> Will you also post how many minutes each guy plays? Also, Hinrich plays so many more minutes than the other Bulls that his stats are inflated.


Edited the post with the minutes.


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaUnbreakableKinG</b>!
> Parker no doubt.
> 
> Controls the best team in the league.


That would be Duncan. And to be completely accurate, Nash controls the best team in the league.


----------



## Debt Collector (Mar 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> nothing really inconsistent about those stats he's putting up. It's hard to be "wildly inconsistent" and still shoot 48 percent from the field.


not hard when you sandwich a 26 and 21 point scoring night with a 7 point outburst and 4 point extravaganza as he did just last week. the guy some games looks like the best PG in the league, other nights is completely invisible


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> nothing really inconsistent about those stats he's putting up. It's hard to be "wildly inconsistent" and still shoot 48 percent from the field.


Uh no, not really. It's actually pretty easy to be wildy inconsistent and shoot 48% from the floor. For example, one night he shoots 58% from the floor, another night he shoots 38% from the floor. That's Parker just about every other game.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> Uh no, not really. It's actually pretty easy to be wildy inconsistent and shoot 48% from the floor. For example, one night he shoots 58% from the floor, another night he shoots 38% from the floor. That's Parker just about every other game.


Assuming he shot the same amount of shots in both games.


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

I'll take Kirk Hinrich, just. 

*Defense: Advantage Kirk*
Let's start with half the game, defense. Kirk is a better man-on defender than Tony, and thats been shown as he's been guarding some 2's around the league. Kirk gets nearly half a steal per game more. Kirk has helped these Bulls get to number 1 in Opp. FG%

*Offense: Even*
Parker only just gets this advantage. He gets .6 less points per game, in 3 less minutes. Parker scores at a much higher FG%. I was close to giving this to Hinrich, as Kirk is a better 3pt shooter and a MUCH better free throw shooter

*Playmaking: Advantage Kirk* 
Kirk seems to make the better pass, more often than TP. Kirk has top-notch Bball IQ, and he knows what pass to make. TP is still a pretty good passer, but Kirk is better. He averages more assists (1.1 to be exact)

Overall, they're both great PG's and I'd be ecstatic if my Mavs got one of them. But as others said, Parker can be extremely inconsistent. He'll givee you 20/9 on one night, and 14/6 the other. The PG position is the coach out on the floor, and Hinrich does a better job at running his team than TP. And his D is a level above aswell

Vote: Hinrich


----------



## darknezx (Apr 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Whodinee</b>!
> 
> 
> not hard when you sandwich a 26 and 21 point scoring night with a 7 point outburst and 4 point extravaganza as he did just last week. the guy some games looks like the best PG in the league, other nights is completely invisible


It's not even like he can't score, Parker just doesn't assert himself. :no:


----------



## MagnusPinus (Aug 27, 2003)

L'enfant du pays.. Tony Parker... His ability to penetrate and score in the paint is abnormal fot a point guard...plus he is the playmaker of the best team of the Nba.. Kirk is a better shooter and is more consistent but I would take Tony anyday...


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

It seems to me that it's not Parker's jump shot that's inconsistent, it's his aggressiveness. Some nights he looks like a superstar because he's a threat to shoot from the outside, attack the basket, or set up Tim Duncan for an easy bucket. Other nights, he passes up open shots like it's his job. That doesn't hurt his shooting percentage much, but it sure does make him a worse player.

I don't care what anyone says about how Parker would flourish on a team that opened things up for him, if he didn't play on the Spurs no one would consider him even an above average point guard. Hnrich is way better.


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

I'll go with Parker. He runs the best team in the league. I'm really impressed with his rebounding numbers.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

I don't know what Parker would do if he wasn't chained down by the Spurs offense, but I have to believe with the intangibles he's shown (good penetrator, decent shooter, good playmaking ability) that he'd be an 18-7 kinda guy. 

That said, I like Hinrich a lot more. He's already taking the pressure shots for the bulls, he's already a better offensive player than Parker, I think his playmaking ability is right up there with Parker, and he's got way more upside in my opinion. Not to mention Hinrich is a more versatile on the ball defender. You know what you're gonna get with Hinrich, and you're getting a lot, something you can't really say with Parker.

(And Tim Duncan runs the Spurs offense. TP has his nights, but it goes through Duncan first nearly every possesion.)


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> 
> 
> Uh no, not really. It's actually pretty easy to be wildy inconsistent and shoot 48% from the floor. For example, one night he shoots 58% from the floor, another night he shoots 38% from the floor. That's Parker just about every other game.


So his low point in that example would be close to Hinrich's average....what's your point? 48 percent is 48 percent. He hits almost half of the shots he has taken. That's not inconsistent.


----------



## thegreatnero (Jan 8, 2005)

I haven't seen Hinrich play, so I'll just be a homer and go with Parker. I don't think Parker is inconsistent, it's like someone said, some games he just doesn't score a lot, and it's because he doesn't need to. He just takes what the defense gives him. A players job on offense is to help his TEAM score, if they're scoring well you can't fault a player for putting up to few shots. It's the 3/15 shooting nights that you worry about, and he doesn't have many of those.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

interesting to note, Hinrich is a year older than Parker.

Damn Tony has been around for awhile.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

As much as I hate to say it, Kirk Hinrich.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BabyBlueSlugga7</b>!
> As much as I hate to say it, Kirk Hinrich.


why do you hate to say it? He's our point guard.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KL Dawger</b>!
> 
> 
> That would be Duncan. And to be completely accurate, Nash controls the best team in the league.


I thought Parker was the PG??  

Also I don't look at the records. ( I did before and Kings got beat even though they were the best if you were to look at the record)

The best teams IMO:

Spurs
Heat
then:
sonics,suns,kings,mavs in no particular order.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaUnbreakableKinG</b>!
> 
> 
> I thought Parker was the PG??
> ...


Do the Spurs spend their offseasons looking for wing players for Parker to kick out to or Duncan? Parker has a big part in running the offense, but like I said the ball goes into Duncan first, and he dictates from there. You might see highlights of Parker coming off P&Rs all day, but he only takes "sole" control of the Spurs on his hot nights, when Duncan lets him go. I could say that's Duncan dictating the offense also by letting Parker do his thing, but I'll just stop here.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

*Efficiency Rating*
Hinrich: +17.39
Parker: +15.61

*Roland Ratings*
Hinrich: #28
Parker: not in top 50

http://www.82games.com/rolandratings0405.htm

My vote: Hinrich, hands down. I've been saying this for a long time now.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

*make duncan better.*

hinrich has a hard nose, but tony has a soft ***. kirk, he's just better than parker.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> why do you hate to say it? He's our point guard.


I was so hard on the dude last year, but this year he is a completely different player. I don't hate that Hinrich is better, but I hate to have my opinion from last year be so stupid. But Hinrich is a completely different player this year. He is more efficient, an actual leader just not given the rank of it, controls the offense (curry is still the anchor) playing better defense too, all while putting up good stats.

3 guys can result to the Bulls recent winning.

Kirk Hinrich- Controls the Offense
Eddy Curry- Offensive Anchor
Tyson Chandler- Defesnsive Anchor

Ben Gordon has been good too same with Deng but they aren't one of the top reasons we are winning.


----------



## Sad Mafioso (Nov 7, 2004)

It's hard to compare because they are on different teams, conferences, circumstances for that matter.

I would take Parker because he's more experienced, still young and at 19 he wasl already owning the Glove, and has had his number ever since. The thing that impresses me the most ouf of his play besides the high FG% which is in large part a result of getting layups from cuts/screens, is that he doesn't go "outside" the system even if he has the physical ability to do so.

Hinrich is a good PG and could shine with SA.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Surprise, surprise, I'm going with Parker. 





As of late, Parker is creating for his teammates, making him a much better player. Plus, Parker gets to the basket as good as any PG in the league, and he's a nice finisher. Parker's play is inconsistent, but not his shooting %'s. It's hard to say a guy has been inconsistent from the field when he's shooting nearly 50% from the floor as a guard. Defensively, it's a push. Parker doesn't get his hands on as many balls as he should considering he's blazing fast, but I love the pressure he can put on opposing teams because of his footspeed. Hinrich has the better numbers, and that's why many think he's the better PG. That's fair, but Parker is a top-contributor for one of the best teams in the league, which doesn't automatically make him the better player, but it makes a case of how good he is. 




If, if Tony Parker develops his jump shot more, he's a top-tier PG in the very near future. That's a big if though. It's not like he's running out of time anyway.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> *Efficiency Rating*
> Hinrich: +17.39
> Parker: +15.61
> ...







It's not hands down, that's for damn sure. I'm not completely denying the case that Hinrich is better, but he sure as hell isn't hands down better. If Hinrich is hands down better than Parker, Hinrich is one of the best PG's in the league, and Parker is mediocre. They're on the same notch of talent to me.






Take the stats and run with it, but again, Parker is a top contributor for one of the best teams in the league. Yes, Duncan is on the Spurs, but his role has drastically decreased, and Parker's role has drastically increased.


----------



## Baron Davis (Apr 14, 2004)

Parker has already proven that he can be a part of a championship team. 
Let's see if Hinrich can be part of one.


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

i like kirk because he took this team to win like 6 straight games and back into the playoff hunt after starting 1-9


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> So his low point in that example would be close to Hinrich's average....what's your point? 48 percent is 48 percent. He hits almost half of the shots he has taken. That's not inconsistent.


What's not to understand? One night Player A shoots 10% and racks up 1 assist, the other night Player A shoots 90% and racks up 9 assists. That's wildly inconsistent. That's Parker in a nutshell, get it? It cost them the WCSF last year, remember?


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

That said, there's not a whole lot of difference between the two, though I'd say there's a relatively noticeable edge to Hinrich.

That is, Parker's the better penetrator, finisher, and sometimes better scorer (his low FT% hurts his scoring efficiency though). Hinrich, however, is the better defender by a pretty good margin, the far more consistent player (he's like Bibby, very steady), the better and more reliable outside shooter (especially 3-pointers), and the better pure PG (Hinrich's A/TO is 3.0 compared to Parker's 2.21). 

I'd take Hinrich over Parker if given the choice, certainly, but I wouldn't be devastated if I were forced to pick Parker.


----------



## Balance (Jan 15, 2005)

Tony Parker looks like spiderman and I hate spiderman so I choose Kirk Hinrich.


----------



## Torim (Jun 22, 2004)

What are Parker's playoff stats?
From what little I remember he seemed to turn his game up a notch in the playoffs.

That should be taken into consideration.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Torim</b>!
> What are Parker's playoff stats?
> From what little I remember he seemed to turn his game up a notch in the playoffs.


Pretty much exactly the same as his regular season stats, give or take a few in a couple categories.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Parker was also inconsistent in the playoffs. For the first 2 games he looked like the best point guard in the league in the Lakers series, but then in the other games he looked like Rick Brunson.


----------



## Turkish Delight (Mar 17, 2004)

Parker easily. 
He had a bad start to the season, but he has been playing a lot better lately.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Turkish Delight</b>!
> Parker easily.
> He had a bad start to the season, but he has been playing a lot better lately.


*Month of January*

Parker: 16.0 ppg, 6.8 apg (2.3:1 A/TO), 3.1 rpg, 0.8 spg, 52% FG, 29% 3PT, 61% FT. 

Hinrich: 16.9 ppg, 8.6 apg (3.4:1 A/TO), 4.1 rpg, 1.9 spg, 45% FG, 41% 3PT, 75% FT.


----------



## Killuminati (Jul 30, 2002)

Captain Kirk easily for reasons already stated.


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Torim</b>!
> What are Parker's playoff stats?
> From what little I remember he seemed to turn his game up a notch in the playoffs.
> 
> That should be taken into consideration.


I agree with this. Parker is a big game player. He seems to always step up his game come playoff time; especially his scoring. I think Parker is also way ahead of Hinrich in terms of experience.

But I like Hinrich better, I like his scrappy defense, and his leadership. It's just right that he's the captain of the surging Bulls team. He drives his team, and keeps everybody happy. And also Hinrich has better all around game, he nearly hit triple double for few times already this season. But maybe it's because he has height advantage over Parker.


----------



## thegreatnero (Jan 8, 2005)

> But maybe it's because he has height advantage over Parker



Oh yeah, a whopping one inch.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>thegreatnero</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, a whopping one inch.


Well, that and he can also jump a lot higher as well.


----------



## thegreatnero (Jan 8, 2005)

Hmmm, I can't remember ever seeing Parker dunk.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

That's my point.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

For what it's worth, Parker can dunk. He's had measley dunks in games before, and lately he's been able to catch an alley-oop with two hands and throw it down in warm-ups.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Exactly Koko. Parker can dunk, he has before in games. He's got "mad hops".


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

i thought almost everybody in the league can dunk? even if not, parker sure can. heck, i bet earl boykins can dunk too(though i've never seen it).


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Yeah, I'd be surpised if there was anyone in the NBA who couldn't dunk, it's just that dunking in an NBA game and dunk in warmups or practice is completely different. In games, you're running up and down so your legs are tired, plus the obvious fact that people are contesting the shots and it's all at gamespeed. You have to be able to dunk with such great ease to be able to do it in games, or else the opportunity to do it is *very* rare. 

Hinrich used to throw down at Kansas a lot, he doesn't do it in the NBA. I think he is still a little scared of trying to finish in the lane, and thats really his only weakness. 

http://www.kusports.com/multimedia/photogalleries/basketball/02-03/tamu/7.jpg


----------



## thegreatnero (Jan 8, 2005)

I don't think Nash can dunk.


----------



## HuejMinitZ (Dec 28, 2004)

*Re:*

I will absolutely guarantee you beyond the shadow of a doubt that Moochie Norris cannot dunk a basketball.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Tony Parker: 16.3 PPG - 6.2 APG - 3.7 RPG - 50 FG% - 65 FT% - 31 3PT% - 2.7 TO - 1.22 SPG - 34 MPG - 16.74 efficiency



Kirk Hinrich: 15.7 PPG - 6.9 APG - 4.2 RPG - 39 FG% - 81 FT% - 34 3PT% - 2.5 TO - 1.51 SPG - 37 MPG - 16.76 efficiency



I know this is like talking to a wall (Considering how many people absolutely love Hinrich on these boards) but I still think Parker is the better player. Statistically Hinrich owned Parker in several statistical categories when this thread was first started, but as you can see, Parker has really narrowed it down. 



Parker remains vastly underrated by several accounts. Hell, I even saw someone say they'd be hardpressed to see the difference between Chris Duhon and Tony Parker. Hinrich > Parker is one thing, but Duhon = Parker is not even reasonable.



I just wanted to see what the opinion is now. The Bulls are doing their thing, but don't overlook how much Parker contributes to one of the best teams in the league as of now.


----------



## tempe85 (Jan 7, 2005)

KokoTheMonkey said:


> I know this is like talking to a wall (Considering how many people absolutely love Hinrich on these boards) but I still think Parker is the better player. Statistically Hinrich owned Parker in several statistical categories when this thread was first started, but as you can see, Parker has really narrowed it down.


What can we expect.. you're a Spurs fan, so you think players on your team's crap doesn't smell bad. 

The funny thing is that this thread was started by a Spurs fan to try to toot his own horn yet it's backfired. I mean 65% to 35%. OUCH.

OUCH. OUCH. And against a player in his second year? Double OUCH.

Ha.. just imagine if this was a Nash vs. Parker poll.... I'm not sure if it's possible but I think Nash could get over 100%. Once Parker gets his Assists/Turnover ratio above 3.0 call me. Before then stop wasting your time.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

tempe85 said:


> The funny thing is that this thread was started by a Spurs fan to try to toot his own horn yet it's backfired. I mean 65% to 35%. OUCH.


It was? I'm a Bulls fan and Hinrich is one of my favorite players. Spurs are _one of_ my favorite teams, and Parker isn't one of my favorite players, I like him and enjoy watching him play, but he isn't a favorite of mine. 

The *real* background behind this thread was a thread started by a Bulls hater in the Bulls forum during last years playoffs. He was praising Parker when he was lighting everyone up, and suggested that Bulls fans were homers for even considering Hinrich to be as good as him. It was a 20+ page thread full of back and forth arguing. Another poster created a thread in the main forum asking who was better, and Parker won in a landslide. I told that poster (rlucas) that the timing was off, because Hinrich was on the 2nd worst team in the league while Parker was playing his best ball of his career. So we both agreed to make another poll in January of 2005 that would provide a more honest answer. Thus, this thread.

Get your facts straight youngster.


----------



## couchman (Dec 20, 2004)

Hahahaha. Parker is better now and has more upside. He's YOUNGER than Hinrich. 

If Hinrich could shoot a respectable fg% it might we a discussion. But the guy has never been above 40%! Parker shoots 50% and as a result he gets MORE points in fewer minutes. The Spurs are the 1 scoring D, so don't discount Tony's D either. He's solid there. 

And in the only time they played each other this year Parker dominated.
Box Score Spurs vs Bulls


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Parker shoots 50% and as a result he gets MORE points in fewer minutes.


Parker has shot 49.6% from the floor _this season_, but 45.8% for his career. That's his only advantage over Hinrich (and it's a fairly big one). Otherwise Hinrich is still clearly the better defender, better playmaker, and better shooter. He's also the far FAR more consistent player. 

But overall, sure, there's not much difference between the two players.


----------



## Admiral (Apr 14, 2004)

EHL said:


> Otherwise Hinrich is still clearly the better defender, better playmaker, and better shooter. He's also the far FAR more consistent player.


All those are arguable..

Tony Parker has been one of the top defensive players for the Spurs this season. Parker's defense has improved enormously and he gives every pointguard he's facing a run for his money. In fact, he's dominated most opposing pointguards in this league. The only one he's ever had a constant problem with was Marbury, and he's even starting to keep him in check. 

Better playmaker? Again arguable.. Better shooter? Parker is shooting 50% and has been shooting over 40% from behind the arc after a poor start. 

I'd give you consistency prior to the start of november, but check the boxscore since then and you'll see Parker consistently scoring in double figures as well as increasingly cricking up his assist and steal totals.

Add the fact that Tony is younger, is carrieng the best team in the league while already having won a ring, these poll results are a farce. I'm the most pessimistic Spurs fan around, but Parker is easily Hinrich's equal and may I give an edge out to either one, it's clearly Tony Parker IMO.


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

EHL said:


> He's also the far FAR more consistent player.


Do you forget the first month or so when Hinrich was shooting in the 30s and generally blowing?


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

I said Parker before and I'll say Parker still. The "advantages" Hinrich has over Parker, as pointed out in this thread are superfluous. Is .1 or .2 difference in a stat really sufficient to say that a person is better at that particular thing? The only things I'd say for sure that Hinrich has a clear advantage in is defense and free throw shooting. The rest is more arguable. I'd say Parker has a clear advantage in play-making and running the fast break.


----------



## Moe The Bartender (May 7, 2004)

Kunlun said:


> That would be Duncan. And to be completely accurate, Nash controls the best team in the league.


No, that WOULD be the Spurs. Nash is better than Parker at this stage, but head to head (2-0) and best overall record indicates Spurs are the best team. You might want to throw in that they played the 4th toughest schedule in the first half of the season.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Hinrich is the better playmaker than Parker?  He rarely breaks the defense down and gets in the lane. Most of his assists are North/South variety, not East/West.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

tempe85 said:


> What can we expect.. you're a Spurs fan, so you think players on your team's crap doesn't smell bad.
> 
> The funny thing is that this thread was started by a Spurs fan to try to toot his own horn yet it's backfired. I mean 65% to 35%. OUCH.
> 
> ...







TROLL.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

KokoTheMonkey said:


> TROLL.


I agree. :yes:


----------



## PobreDiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

Theres too many Balls fans in this forum, this poll is too bias

Hinrich and Parker are almost on the same level, but Parker had the edge in my view, just because Parker had the playoff experience and had his momments in the playoffs while Hinrich has zero experience, but Hinrich is becoming one of the many few True PG's who's ledding an overachieving team (The Balls) and making them a playoff tending

Hinrich has no resume in the playoffs, but regardless is a very good PG, but Parker has more experience in bigger momments


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

I don't buy the age and upside argument. Parker is young, but he has been playing professional ball a long time and has been in the league for 4 years. I think he is pretty close to his prime, regardless of being really young. Hinrich is still inconsistent with his shooting, but anyone who has seen him play knows he has a nice touch, he just has to bring it every night and pick his spots. Once he does that, its really no contest between these two. As it is, I think Hinrich is better because he impacts the game in more ways.


----------



## goNBAjayhawks (May 3, 2003)

PobreDiablo said:


> Theres too many Balls fans in this forum, this poll is too bias
> 
> Hinrich and Parker are almost on the same level, but Parker had the edge in my view, just because Parker had the playoff experience and had his momments in the playoffs while Hinrich has zero experience, but Hinrich is becoming one of the *many few * True PG's who's ledding an overachieving team (The Balls) and making them a playoff tending
> 
> Hinrich has no resume in the playoffs, but regardless is a very good PG, but Parker has more experience in bigger momments



oxymoron?


----------



## PobreDiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

goNBAjayhawks said:


> oxymoron?



Hey give me a break :thand: English wasn't my frirst language :embarrass


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

The thing is Parker seems to be punished because he plays with Duncan. A mediocre PG playing on a different team? Does that mean Hinrich would be the best PG in the league playing for the Spurs?



I think Parker is a better offensive player than Hinrich, even throwing out the stats. He's one of the best fast-break PG's there is, and he's also one of the quickest end-to-end PG's in the league. When he hits his jump shot, he's a top-tier PG. Even when not, he's still better than a mediocre PG. This year he has really grasped the role of a PG, because he has learned to create for teammates more and more while getting his scoring-wise. You know what, I'm not buying the consistency excuse anymore out of Parker. In 15 out of the last 21 games, he's scored 20+ points, and in only one of those 21 games did he have fewer than 5 assists. Plus, he gets to the line more, so the worse free throw percentage doesn't make that much of a differenece between the two. He's the better all around offensive player if you ask me. Defensively, everybody raves about Hinrich, and deservingly so. He can guard PG's and SG's, making him vore versatile and more valuable defensively. Parker has played very good defense as well this season, but doesn't get much attention for it. Edge: Hinrich.


They basically balance out in the offense/defense categories, and then I'd go with Parker in the intangibles category. I don't have a problem accepting the opinion that Hinrich is better than Parker, but I do have a problem accepting the opinion that Hinrich is much better than Parker. The results have changed quite a bit since I bumped this thread, so that tells me that Hinrich gained a huge advantage because he was the "sexy" player to talk about when this thread was started.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Hong Kong Fooey said:


> Hinrich is the better playmaker than Parker?


The numbers sure seem to indicate as much.

*"Close" assists (ie, assists leading to points in the paint and dunks)*
Hinrich: 41.3% of total assists
Parker: 29.9% of total assists

*Dunk assists*
Hinrich: 54
Parker: 24

http://www.82games.com

Parker averages 1 assist every 5.46 minutes playing alongside 2 All-Stars, while Hinrich averages 1 assist every 5.43 minutes while playing half his minutes at shooting guard. As noted above, Hinrich sets his teammates up close to the basket with significantly greater frequency than does Parker.

One other thing -- Hinrich also dominates Parker in 82games.com's "Hands Rating" (a measure of ballhandling skill). This should come as no surprise, as Hinrich's A/TO (2.8:1) is markedly better than Parker's (2.3:1).

So yes, a very valid argument can be made that Hinrich is a better playmaker than Parker.


----------



## dn0774 (Feb 26, 2005)

Parker has always done most of his assisting on drive and kickouts to the Spurs shooters (namely Bowen, Manu, Barry). Does that make his assists any less valuable? Considering most of those kickouts lead to 3 pointers, I would say not. That would help explain why he doesn't assist on a lot of dunks. Also, Duncan doesn't dunk a lot and Nesterovich rarely dunks. Curry, Chandler and Davis on the other hand dunk all the time. Big deal, 2 points is 2 points.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

2 points is indeed 2 points. The thing is, Hinrich has virtually the same frequency of assists (to a less-talented offensive team, no less) as does Parker -- while playing only half his minutes at point guard.

Like I said, the argument that Hinrich is a better playmaker than Parker is valid.


----------



## M.D.E (Feb 26, 2005)

man....tony freakin parker...nuff said


----------



## Ravnos (Aug 10, 2004)

tempe85 is just as annoying as BigAmare. What is it with these Suns fans?


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Man, this board is feeble. First it's Parker hands down, then it's Hinrich hands down, now it's Parker hands down again. Goodness.


----------



## tempe85 (Jan 7, 2005)

Ravnos said:


> tempe85 is just as annoying as BigAmare. What is it with these Suns fans?


I voted for Parker... I just thought it was ironic that a thread started by someone I thought was a Spurs fan (though it seems people on this board have multiple favorite teams so I was mistaken) was going the wrong way.


----------



## dn0774 (Feb 26, 2005)

I wouldn't say its either of them hands down. Personally, I would take Parker, but Hinrich is no sluch. Parker is a proven playoff performer while Hinrich is still a mystery in that aspect. Sure, Parker did not have a great series against the Lakers last year, but he took the Grizzlies apart in the series before. Also, in 2003 Parker had a great playoff run. He even played Jason Kidd to a standstill in the Finals. 

Someone said earlier that he is probably near his prime which I disagree with. I refuse to believe that a 22 year old is at or near his prime. TP's shot still needs lots of work as does his decision making.


----------



## Ravnos (Aug 10, 2004)

tempe85 said:


> I voted for Parker... I just thought it was ironic that a thread started by someone I thought was a Spurs fan (though it seems people on this board have multiple favorite teams so I was mistaken) was going the wrong way.


Yeah, and then you threw in stuff about Nash, who wasn't in the poll, and wasn't brought up in the thread.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

I'll take Tony Parker, and not just cause I'm a Spurs fan. I'll tell you why. 

He is a better scorer. He is infinitley better than Hinrich at dribble penetration and can get into the lane at will. He has an ever improving shot that is just as good as Hinrich's. His floater is pretty much money, and he could be averaging over 20 points per game if he got to play more minutes per game. After a rough start to the season, he has been much more consistent. He has 20+ points in 5 of the last 6 games. He is held back by the Spurs system whereas Hinrich is free to score. Parker also shoots 10% points better than Hinrich.

Parker is also a better creator. He may not get as many assists but he surely creates as many if not more opportunities for his teammates than Hinrich does. His dribble penetration causes the defenses to collapse and he almost always get TD with a pass, or the baseline pass back outside for a three.

Hinrich does have better defense and is much more aggressive, but overall I think Parker is a better player.


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

didn't wanna read all the posts in this thread, but it's always been Parker hands down for me.


----------



## Debt Collector (Mar 13, 2003)

well... i said hinrich originally and im sticking to that, but parker's had the better month. the bulls cooled off and so did hinrich's play. id like to see what hinrich could do on a team like the spurs. in reality, they are about as even as it gets, i prefer hinrich still but parker's been playing really well lately averaging 21.0 ppg over the last 5 games and he's been getting more consistent. ask me again after the season.


----------



## tempe85 (Jan 7, 2005)

Ravnos said:


> Yeah, and then you threw in stuff about Nash, who wasn't in the poll, and wasn't brought up in the thread.


Just like your previous post had anything to do with the subject of this thread?

Your post:
tempe85 is just as annoying as BigAmare. What is it with these Suns fans?


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Admiral said:


> All those are arguable..
> 
> Tony Parker has been one of the top defensive players for the Spurs this season. Parker's defense has improved enormously and he gives every pointguard he's facing a run for his money. In fact, he's dominated most opposing pointguards in this league. The only one he's ever had a constant problem with was Marbury, and he's even starting to keep him in check.


Saying opposing PGs don't go off on Parker is a more a reflection of the Spurs' team defense than Tony Parker's individual defensive abilities.



> Better playmaker? Again arguable..


How? Granted, it's not a huge difference. But OK, it's pretty close.



> Better shooter? Parker is shooting 50% and has been shooting over 40% from behind the arc after a poor start.


FG% does not = better shooter. Shooting. Uh, Parker is shooting 30.6% from behind the arc this season. 40%? That's just cherry picking your sample sizes.



> I'd give you consistency prior to the start of november, but check the boxscore since then and you'll see Parker consistently scoring in double figures as well as increasingly cricking up his assist and steal totals.


Look at his whole career. 



> Add the fact that Tony is younger, is carrieng the best team in the league while already having won a ring, these poll results are a farce.


"Carrying" the best team in the league? Sorry but the only one carrying the Spurs is Tim Duncan. Come on now.



Pan Mengtu said:


> Do you forget the first month or so when Hinrich was shooting in the 30s and generally blowing?


Did you forget Parker's entire career. Yes, yes you did.


----------



## svanacore (Nov 21, 2004)

EHL, stop being a homer dude. 

Even Chris Duhon has been shooting better than Kirk Hinrich lately, which should tell you something.

I'd take Tony Parker anyday.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Even with Hinrich's shooting slump and Parker's string of hot shooting, Hinrich is still the more efficient player.

Hinrich: +16.81 Efficiency Rating
Parker: +16.76 Efficiency Rating

I imagine these numbers will spread apart once Hinrich climbs out of his shooting slump.


----------



## dn0774 (Feb 26, 2005)

VincentVega said:


> Even with Hinrich's shooting slump and Parker's string of hot shooting, Hinrich is still the more efficient player.
> 
> Hinrich: +16.81 Efficiency Rating
> Parker: +16.76 Efficiency Rating
> ...


So what you are saying is that Parker is almost equall to Hinrich statistically (.05 is negligble) despite playing 4 less minutes per game. In other words, you just posted stats that upon further research support the argument that Tony Parker is better. Thanks.


----------



## Sánchez AF (Aug 10, 2003)

Kirk All the way


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

tony parker of course. he has a way better fg% and better defence. his other numbers are lower by slim margins. he causes hell for the defence in ways Kirk doesn't. and i dont care if kirk has a better J. they are scoring the same points and tony has a better percentage. plus tim is on a team where he doesn't handle the ball as much as kirk, so he has less assists. if tony was on the bulls he would be scoring 20 a game.


----------



## goNBAjayhawks (May 3, 2003)

And if Kirk was on the spurs his shooting % would go up, i would pick hinrich, but i think they are pretty close and as of now can go either way. The amount each has left to improve is not predictable and it could be a few more seasons or possibly never when a clear cut answer surfaces.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

goNBAjayhawks said:


> And if Kirk was on the spurs his shooting % would go up, i would pick hinrich, but i think they are pretty close and as of now can go either way. The amount each has left to improve is not predictable and it could be a few more seasons or possibly never when a clear cut answer surfaces.


But that's why tony is better. the reason Kirk's % would be better on the spurs is because he would have more room to shoot, but tony scores at the basket, which he can do on any team. but he cant score as much on the spurs because he has to defer to timmy, which isnt a bad thing :biggrin:


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

svanacore said:


> EHL, stop being a homer dude.
> 
> Even Chris Duhon has been shooting better than Kirk Hinrich lately, which should tell you something.
> 
> I'd take Tony Parker anyday.


Homer? I'm a Laker fan "d00d".


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

dn0774 said:


> So what you are saying is that Parker is almost equall to Hinrich statistically (.05 is negligble) despite playing 4 less minutes per game. In other words, you just posted stats that upon further research support the argument that Tony Parker is better. Thanks.


Efficiency Rating adjusts for minutes played.

Please try to have a basic understanding of the topic before trying to jump into an argument that is in serious need of cogent discussion. Thanks.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

The decision was pretty close for me initially, and it still is. Now that Parker has improved one of his bigger knocks, consistency, I'd have to take him as my PG over Hinrich. It's a pretty agonizing decision, but I would probably take Parker as the more efficient scorer, I think he's the better penetrator, hence a lot of open kickouts on the wing, I'd take him as the decision maker, and I'd probably slightly take him in the intangibles department, as he's led his team during pressure situations on the bigger stages. They are surprisingly similiar when you look at both players singular, so I think team success, etc. came into account for me.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

DRE! wassup. u the same dre frm CL?


----------



## M.D.E (Feb 26, 2005)

Tony has way more potential if you ask me...he has a knack 2 score and will take it 2 the hole on ne one


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

Tony Parker and Kirk Hinrich, you say? Gotta go w/ TP. He's not flawless, but he's much more proven.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Parker's last 41 games (Every game other than the November games)

17.6 PPG
6.6 APG
3.9 REB
2.7 TO
52 FG%
34 3PT%



Not bad, huh? Too bad his November numbers hurt his overall ones so much.




Again, stats are stats, take them for what they are worth. We can trade stats in this argument all day long, but at the end of the day it's in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

And at the end of the day if I were told to reach in a hat and draw either Tony Parker or Kirk Hinrich as my point guard, I'd be a pretty damned happy guy picking either player.


----------



## djtoneblaze (Nov 22, 2004)

Kunlun said:


> I like Kirk Hinrich better mainly because I see him as a better point guard. Tony Parker may be better at individual skills though.


Hinrich is more of a shoot first guard than Parker.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

VincentVega said:


> Efficiency Rating adjusts for minutes played.


Efficiency Rating adjusts for GAMES, not minutes, played. 

((PTS + REB + AST + STL + BLK) - ((FGA - FGM) + (FTA - FTM) + TO)) / G

G = Game



VincentVega said:


> Please try to have a basic understanding of the topic before trying to jump into an argument that is in serious need of cogent discussion. Thanks.


A bit harsh considering you are completely wrong, huh?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Since, Efficiency Rating adjusts for GAMES, not minutes, played, let's look at John Hollinger's PER rating. The PER is a super-charged effeciency score that does adjust for minutes. A score of 15.0 indicates average starter in the league.

http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/jh_Spurs.htm

Parker 18.9

http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/jh_Bulls.htm

Hinrich 15.28

------------------------------------

That's a pretty sizable gap.


----------



## M.D.E (Feb 26, 2005)

^^^^^

yes it is


----------



## couchman (Dec 20, 2004)

In their most recent games:

Parker 19 points on 50%shooting, 10 assists and 8 rebounds. 

Hinrich 4points on 40%shooting, 5 assists and 0 rebounds.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

VincentVega said:


> And at the end of the day if I were told to reach in a hat and draw either Tony Parker or Kirk Hinrich as my point guard, I'd be a pretty damned happy guy picking either player.


Agreed. Both guys are very good up and coming point guards and I would love to have either one of them on my team. They are very equal in talent level and production, so really it is just in the eye of the beholder like Koko said. If you want a tougher, three point shooting PG you go with Hinrich, whereas if you want a guy who can get to the rim at will, and a more adept scorer/creator then you go with Parker. Either way your getting a hell of a player.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Spurs vs. Bulls tonight

Hinrich 3-10 for 6 points. 5 Rbs. 5 Assists. 5 TOs. 24 minutes

Parker 10-18 for 25 points 4 Rbs. 8 Assists. 5 TOs. 24 minutes

They didn't guard each much put Parker was blowing by all of the Bulls guards.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

texan said:


> Agreed. Both guys are very good up and coming point guards and I would love to have either one of them on my team. They are very equal in talent level and production, so really it is just in the eye of the beholder like Koko said. If you want a tougher, three point shooting PG you go with Hinrich, whereas if you want a guy who can get to the rim at will, and a more adept scorer/creator then you go with Parker. Either way your getting a hell of a player.


Hinrich is not a 3pt shooting pg.

He's a terrible shooter, period.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

I guess it was proven tonight. Kirk was OWNED


----------



## ravor44 (Feb 26, 2005)

Tony....even though Hinrich is a better player.its like choosing Kidd or Baron..and i chose Kidd...I choose Parker coz he's similar to Kidd...


----------



## HEATLUNATIC (May 27, 2002)

ravor44 said:


> Tony....even though Hinrich is a better player.its like choosing Kidd or Baron..and i chose Kidd...I choose Parker coz he's similar to Kidd...


Parker is similar to Kidd?:laugh: 

Hes incapable of running an offense and he couldn't guard a chair!

If you gave Kidd a post presence like Duncan he would prolly average 12-15 apg!


----------



## KJay (Sep 22, 2002)

they both have their strengths

Tony - bonning Eva.
Kirk - a Jayhawk


so I went with the jayhawk.


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

The Truth said:


> Hinrich is not a 3pt shooting pg.
> 
> He's a terrible shooter, period.


hinrich isnt a terrible shooter, hes just inconsistant. he'll have huge games where he'll be hitting all his shots and then he'll have 2 bad shooting games. once he gets consistency he'll be a good shooter but he isnt a terrible shooter still. that would mean KG and Iverson are also terrible shooters.


----------



## joshed_up (Aug 6, 2005)

go with hinrich. parker has been inconsistent too often, but when he lights up, hes irresistable on offense.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

VincentVega said:


> *Efficiency Rating*
> Hinrich: +17.39
> Parker: +15.61
> 
> ...


These ratings reversed themselves by the end of the season.

Efficiency Rating
Hinrich: +16.22
Parker: +16.44

Roland Ratings
Hinrich: -4.5 (one of the worst on the Bulls' team)
Parker: +3.8

I actually think neither of these statistics means much (and I suspect that the only reason they were brought up in the first place is because they were favorable to Hinrich). Hinrich is better than Parker, but I think both of these players have been underachievers during their NBA careers. It's time for them to step up, they're already in their mid-20s.


----------



## The_Black_Pinoy (Jul 6, 2005)

ravor44 said:


> Tony....even though Hinrich is a better player.its like choosing Kidd or Baron..and i chose Kidd...*I choose Parker coz he's similar to Kidd*...


ummm no. I will take Hinrich any day of the week over Parkers Marshmallow ***.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Damn, Hinrich jumped back into the league? I think this poll changed leads at least 3-4 times since it was created. 



Anyway, I still think it's very close, but I still like Parker. It's harder after watching Parker in last year's playoffs, but I still think Parker is the better player when both guys are at their best.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

parker for sure. teams don't go to chicago with plans on stopping kirk. they do when it somes to tony, manu, and timmy.


----------



## MitchMatch (Jul 20, 2004)

Hinrich is alot better...


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

duncan2k5 said:


> parker for sure. teams don't go to chicago with plans on stopping kirk. they do when it somes to tony, manu, and timmy.


No.


----------



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

Tony Parker, am not going to even explain. This is not a good comparison to begin with


----------



## JCB (Aug 9, 2005)

i take Kirk, just because i don't really like Parker


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

The Truth said:


> Hinrich is not a 3pt shooting pg.
> 
> He's a terrible shooter, period.



Uhhh... He has shot 37% three's over the span of his career, and its not like he doesn't shoot alot of them. Also, in comparison to Parker, he's really a damn good shooter.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

EHL said:


> No.


ummm...yes. you dont watch all our games so u wont know


----------



## theyoungsrm (May 23, 2003)

would the people that say.....

"Oh man this is not even close, Tony Parker, easily".

or

"Obviously, Kirk Hinrich, I'm not even gonna explain"


please stop posting on the threat....Please


We are not comparing KG to Mark Madsen, whichever way you go both players are pretty good and your comments do nothing for the quality of the thread.

Go play with yourselves


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

duncan2k5 said:


> ummm...yes. you dont watch all our games so u wont know


By that rationale, you don't watch every Bulls game so you shouldn't be posting about Kirk Hinrich.


----------



## Dooch (Aug 1, 2005)

For now, Kirk Hinrich is over Tony Parker.. Tony Parker can be inconsistent at times and make mental mistakes... turning the ball over, etc.. Kirk Hinrich helps his team (Chicago Bulls) out more than Tony Parker helps out the San Antonio Spurs; because Tony Parker has a bunch of other great players on the San Antonio Spurs (Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, Bruce Bowen who I absolutely hate, etc.) while Kirk Hinrich has to deal with Luol Deng, Ben Gordon, Tyson Chandler, Chris Duhon.. and now since the trade involving Eddy Curry happened the Chicago Bulls now have Tim Thomas and Michael Sweetney.. So Kirk Hinrich for now.. :cheers:


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

duncan2k5 said:


> ummm...yes. you dont watch all our games so u wont know


No one cares that you met Tim Duncan.


----------



## spursindonesia (Mar 6, 2003)

Anybody has comments regarding their performance tonite ? Wanna switch allegiance ?


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

For one, you're not going to find Parker shooting 4/18 from the field all that much, and that's whether or not Duncan was playing. 

Parker's quickness is the best attribute either player has, and aside from shooting I don't know what Hinrich does that's so much better than Parker.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

whoever says hinrich is better than tony doesn't know basketball


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

KokoTheMonkey said:


> For one, you're not going to find Parker shooting 4/18 from the field all that much, and that's whether or not Duncan was playing.
> 
> Parker's quickness is the best attribute either player has, and aside from shooting I don't know what Hinrich does that's so much better than Parker.


Nothing. Parker is a better player and a better PG. He is quicker and runs his team better. Shooting is about the same. Parker just can't be denied the lane and that is the difference.


----------



## jibikao (Nov 14, 2004)

It's hard to compare when you have Duncan on your team drawing almost ALL the attention. It's just hard to compare. 

I think Parker is a great scoring guard. He is inconsistent and even Pop can get very mad at him sometimes. 

I haven't watched many of Kirk's game so I picked Parker instead. Then again, who knows what Parker can do if he is playing for Chicago...?


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Bump.

Forget about the great start Parker has had, Hinrich has just sucked this season. Jump shot isn't getting any better and neither is his consistency. Ugh.


----------



## Whack Arnolds (Dec 5, 2005)

Kirk > TP.

For one, I am mad jealous Parker is boning Longoria, especially since dude isn't even handsome. Second of all, Kirk is just a better all-around player and is much more basketball savvy. Plus he plays defense.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Hinrich may play defense, but I don't think he plays offense.


----------



## Whack Arnolds (Dec 5, 2005)

KokoTheMonkey said:


> Hinrich may play defense, but I don't think he plays offense.


Does TP even do that? I say Kirk is just as effecient on offense as Parker is. Maybe better due to decision making skills, etc. Plus Hinrich isn't even close to having the supporting cast that Parker does. Kirk would do just as well if not better on offense if he wa splugged into the Spurs system. TP is an idiot with no jumpshot.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Whack Arnolds said:


> Does TP even do that? I say Kirk is just as effecient on offense as Parker is. Maybe better due to decision making skills, etc. Plus Hinrich isn't even close to having the supporting cast that Parker does. Kirk would do just as well if not better on offense if he wa splugged into the Spurs system. TP is an idiot with no jumpshot.



Parker is playing like an all-star this season. He's truly been leading the Spurs like he should this year. His decision making has improved tenfold and he keeps improving his defense(which was greatly improved last year). Honestly stats aren't everything but when there is such a big gap in numbers, it has to mean something.

Parker: 20.1 PPG, 4.0 RPG, 6.2 APG, 1.38 SPG, FG% 53.7%, 3.1 TO/Game
Hinrich: 13.2 PPG, 2.8 RPG, 6.5 APG, 1.07 SPG, FG% 40.2% 2.59 TO/Game

Parker is just hands down the better player right now. He is statistically better than Hinrich in basically every category with Hinrich holding the advantage in APG, 3PT FG% and TO per game. Other than that, Parker kills him and in the areas Hinrich holds a statistical advantage, Parker is hardly behind him(excl. 3PT percentage).


----------



## Whack Arnolds (Dec 5, 2005)

There is no denying Parker is having his best year, but I feel as a whole Hinrich is still the better player.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Where's Vega at?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

I think it's time to stop disrespecting Parker as Hinrich is clearly not on his level....

A better thread would be Hinrich vs. Barbosa...

And yes I think Barbosa is better.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Whack Arnolds said:


> There is no denying Parker is having his best year, but I feel as a whole Hinrich is still the better player.



You are clearly ignoring or denying facts. Give Parker his due. He is easily the better player.


----------



## Whack Arnolds (Dec 5, 2005)

texan said:


> You are clearly ignoring or denying facts. Give Parker his due. He is easily the better player.


Im not looking a stats. Im looking at what I see on the floor when I watch the two play. I think Hinrich is the better player.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Parker is clearly having the better year, if he keeps his play up throughout his prime career, I can concede that he is the better player if Hinrich can't fill out his abilities. Hinrich was the better player last year, though, so one year a better player does not make. Parker has turned the corner finally it looks like, while Hinrich has not yet. When he does, he'll be the better player, as he has more potential in my opinion.


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

Parker without a doubt, any day of the week.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Whack Arnolds said:


> Im not looking a stats. Im looking at what I see on the floor when I watch the two play. I think Hinrich is the better player.



You need to watch the Spurs a few more times.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

texan said:


> You need to watch the Spurs a few more times.


The Spurs are on national TV twice a week. The Bulls are on national TV twice a year.

Put Hinrich on the Spurs and Parker on the Bulls and see what happens...


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Whack Arnolds said:


> Does TP even do that? I say Kirk is just as effecient on offense as Parker is.


Statistically, he's not even close to Parker's efficiency.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

The again, Tony Parker doesn't have to guard (and be guarded by) shooting guards and small forwards.


----------



## BigMac (Jan 14, 2005)

Kirk is overrated by alot of people on this broad.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

BigMac said:


> Kirk is overrated by alot of people on this broad.


Wonder why that is.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Hinrich was guarded by Shawn Marion tonight and ended up with 25 points, 4 assists, 3 rebounds, 3 assists, 3 steals and 1 block. Overrated my a$$.


----------



## Whack Arnolds (Dec 5, 2005)

sherako said:


> Wonder why that is.


B/C He's white and he's better than Tony Parker?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

VincentVega said:


> Hinrich was guarded by Shawn Marion tonight and ended up with 25 points, 4 assists, 3 rebounds, 3 assists, 3 steals and 1 block. Overrated my a$$.


And the Bulls lost.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Whack Arnolds said:


> B/C He's white


Nailed it...

Let's not generalize or bait fan-bases. - *Premier*

The organization ran off half the team his rookie year so HE could play, the double standards that exist on the Bulls board are beyond ridiculous when it comes to that kid.

I have no problem saying this, and there are some people that know exactly what I'm talking about and would agree with me, more likely privately than publicly.

Facts are this...

1. He's a great defender, that gets lit up more often than not.

2. He's not a difference maker, why? Difference makers help teams WIN ball games...
How often does he lead the team in scoring? His job surely isn't to run the offense, he's not even 
really a point guard anymore, he's doing what he did at Kansas, the games where he has been the 
leading scorer, they've LOST (2 out of the 3 games)

3. He'd be a lot more likeable IMO if fans (especially fan boys like Vega) weren't all over jock...What 
about Gordon? Duhon? Deng? Sweetney? Last year Curry...that teams has other players who 
deserve a lot of credit for the Bulls success, because let's face it, when the Bulls decided to make 
Hinrich their star 2 years ago, they flat out ****in sucked.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

arenas809,

Your prediction for the Bulls last year was totally awesome.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

VincentVega said:


> arenas809,
> 
> Your prediction for the Bulls last year was totally awesome.


Just like everybody else.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

VincentVega said:


> arenas809,
> 
> Your prediction for the Bulls last year was totally awesome.


Write back when that losing streak is over.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

arenas809 said:


> Let's face it, the majority of Bulls fans on bbb are racists, they couldn't WAIT for white bread to come in and be a "star"...


The majority of fans who like and defend Hinrich, are also huge Luol Deng fans. They bring a similar intensity, IQ and all-around game to the Bulls. I'd say you factor race into your judgement of these players more than anyone else. If Hinrich wasn't white, I'm not sure you would hate him so much.

So claiming that a whole fanbase is racist (against the rules, no?) because they traded your favorite player to keep a player you hate, is pretty silly arenas, especially when you consider how much better the Bulls are right now, even as their struggling, compared to the 20 wins teams they were putting on the floor with Crawford and Rose.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Ouch.


----------



## spursindonesia (Mar 6, 2003)

BigMac said:


> Kirk is overrated by alot of people on this broad.


Well, plenty peeps are still waiting for the next great white PG, who is supposed to be a passing machine ala Stockton and Kirk Hinrich is within the description -Great he is NOT.


----------

