# Vince Carter or Manu Ginobili



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

Hands down I take Manu without thinking about. Forget the dunks, I watch And 1 if I want to see hightlights. And Manu has his share of them to add. Manu is a true winner. Gold Medal, Europian Champion. 2 Time NBA Champ. This man is a winner. Forget that highlight, 3 point shooting off balance that looks cute.


----------



## Big Mike (Jun 7, 2005)

Does that make him better than D-Wade also??


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

Big Mike said:


> Does that make him better than D-Wade also??


Yes.


----------



## VCFSO2000 (Apr 10, 2005)

DWadeistheTruth said:


> Hands down I take Manu without thinking about. Forget the dunks, I watch And 1 if I want to see hightlights. And Manu has his share of them to add. *Manu is a true winner. Gold Medal, Europian Champion. 2 Time NBA Champ.* This man is a winner. Forget that highlight, 3 point shooting off balance that looks cute.


What does team accolades have to do with the individual?

In that case,I take Horry over all of them.

Horry's a true winner.

I take Vince.Manu's strength is that he'll blow by you if you give him some room.

That room wouldn't be given to him if it wasn't for TD's presence.

Manu is a better defender than Vince.How much better?We don't know,because TD makes a lot of guys look like defensive stoppers.

Offensively?It's not even a question. Vince has a repertoire that only Kobe and T-Mac can either exceed or rival.He can do it all.

And those off-balanced 3s that look cute,go in.That's like saying,screw manu and his cute circus shots.They go in don't they?

I've never seen Manu play at the NBA level and as the focal point of the offense,getting all the attention.


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

I hate the nets, and hate VC and his bandwagon fans even more. but i'll still admit Carter is much better than manu.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

BenGordon said:


> I hate the nets, and hate VC and his bandwagon fans even more. but i'll still admit Carter is much better than manu.


Dang what did the nets or VC fans to make you feel that way, 'hate' is a very strong word


----------



## VCFSO2000 (Apr 10, 2005)

BenGordon said:


> I hate the nets, and hate VC and his bandwagon fans even more. but i'll still admit Carter is much better than manu.


What did those fans do to you?

There are some who will defend Vince knowing they are wrong,but I hope you don't think everybody's like that.


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

Hbwoy said:


> Dang what did the nets or VC fans to make you feel that way, 'hate' is a very strong word


Nets are the greatest bandwagon team of all-time. nets fans have no loyalty. even Laker Fans would tear up C-Webb if he ever landed on their team.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

VCFSO2000 said:


> What did those fans do to you?
> 
> There are some who will defend Vince knowing they are wrong,but I hope you don't think everybody's like that.


Someone must have said something nasty about his mother.


----------



## kamego (Dec 29, 2003)

VC is my pick here atleast for next few years.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

I'd take Vince during the regular season and Manu during the playoffs.


----------



## tone wone (Jan 30, 2003)

DWadeistheTruth said:


> Hands down I take Manu without thinking about. Forget the dunks, I watch And 1 if I want to see hightlights. And Manu has his share of them to add. Manu is a true winner. Gold Medal, Europian Champion. 2 Time NBA Champ. This man is a winner. Forget that highlight, 3 point shooting off balance that looks cute.


 you want manu to win one of these threads you're gonna have to lower the bar....try a Manu vs. Reshard Lewis or something like that..

he "might" win that one


----------



## THE MATRIX 31 (Jul 22, 2005)

Manu all the way. Like ive siad a thousand times, the guy is incredible.


----------



## skip2 (Aug 4, 2005)

THE MATRIX 31 said:


> Manu all the way. Like ive siad a thousand times, the guy is incredible.


Incredable? Sure..Enough to make a team consistently (or lacking at ALL) a frontcourt to a 27-6 record to finish the season? I think NOT. That's the difference right there...You guys want team accomplishments, look at Manu's teams. Had Manu been on the Raptors, would they have been better off? No.

Had Manu been in the exact position as Vince with NJ, would they even have SNIFFED CLOSE to the 10th seed (never mind 8th) NO. So how would you take Manu over him?


Oh, and this is a Toronto fan who currently hates the selfish loser (VC) for what he did to us, but I can't deny his talent. This guy averaged 27 points during his NJ days, and avged 24 overall, when he dogged it in Toronto with 15. Wow


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Anyone who says Manu doesn't know a thing about basketball.


----------



## JCB (Aug 9, 2005)

BenGordon said:


> Nets are the greatest bandwagon team of all-time.* nets fans have no loyalty*. even Laker Fans would tear up C-Webb if he ever landed on their team.


i been a nets fan since i was 3 . . . . i think im pretty darn loyal


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Vince Carter is a better player. His offensive repertoire is definitley top 3 in the league. His midrange and three-point shooting are much more consistent than Manu's. And their driving abilites are comparable. However, its closer than most are indicating. Manu blows him away on defense, IMO. If Vince tried playing defense, then maybe he would be as good or better defensively than Manu, but that remains undone. I still think Vince is the better player, but Manu isn't much worse.


----------



## VCFSO2000 (Apr 10, 2005)

texan said:


> Vince Carter is a better player. His offensive repertoire is definitley top 3 in the league. His midrange and three-point shooting are much more consistent than Manu's. And their driving abilites are comparable. However, its closer than most are indicating. Manu blows him away on defense, IMO. If Vince tried playing defense, then maybe he would be as good or better defensively than Manu, but that remains undone. I still think Vince is the better player, but Manu isn't much worse.


Good point.


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

Chaser 55 said:


> i been a nets fan since i was 3 . . . . i think im pretty darn loyal


It might not be everyone, but the Net General fanbase has welcomed openly their division rival. do u think the red sox would want A-rod on their team? do u think the redskins would want roy williams? would the lakers want c-webb?


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

BenGordon said:


> It might not be everyone, but the Net General fanbase has welcomed openly their division rival. do u think the red sox would want A-rod on their team? do u think the redskins would want roy williams? would the lakers want c-webb?


When was Toronto a rival of the Nets? They haven't been good at the same time.

Yankee fans accepted the Rocket
Red Sox tried to sign Bernie Williams
Lakers went after C-Webb when he was a free agent.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

better rebounder - VC
better scorer - VC
better passer - VC
better defender - wash
better frontcourt- manu

Manu is a great player, but VC is supertalented, I don't think the spurs would be wise to reject a straight up manu for vc trade... thats scary.


----------



## mauzer (Jun 7, 2005)

Many all the way. He has fundamentials, brains and won it all last year. VC-dunks, selfish play and proven looser.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

mauzer said:


> Many all the way. He has fundamentials, brains and won it all last year. VC-dunks, selfish play and proven looser.


you could make the same argument about why brent barry is better than tracy mcgrady.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

manu - 16 points, 3.9 assists, 4.4 rebounds, 1.61 steals, 2.3 turnovers, 47% shooting, 37.6% from 3, 29.6 minutes a game

vince(nets) - 27.5 points, 4.7 assists, 5.9 rebounds, 1.5 steals, 2.6 turnovers, 46% shooting, 42.5% from 3, 38.9 minutes per game.

i think i'll go with vince carter.


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> When was Toronto a rival of the Nets? They haven't been good at the same time.
> 
> Yankee fans accepted the Rocket
> Red Sox tried to sign Bernie Williams
> Lakers went after C-Webb when he was a free agent.


I said the fans would accept the player, not sign him. Most Oriole fans hate Sammy. i like Sammy but i also grew up in chicago so i dont mind him, but Oriole fans hate the guy.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

rocketeer said:


> manu - 16 points, 3.9 assists, 4.4 rebounds, 1.61 steals, 2.3 turnovers, 47% shooting, 37.6% from 3, 29.6 minutes a game
> 
> vince(nets) - 27.5 points, 4.7 assists, 5.9 rebounds, 1.5 steals, 2.6 turnovers, 46% shooting, 42.5% from 3, 38.9 minutes per game.
> 
> i think i'll go with vince carter.


Stats never tell the entire story


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

BenGordon said:


> I said the fans would accept the player, not sign him. Most Oriole fans hate Sammy. i like Sammy but i also grew up in chicago so i dont mind him, but Oriole fans hate the guy.


The last 2 head coaches for the Steelers played for the Browns. Not every fan shares your limited view.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> Stats never tell the entire story


no, but would you take brent barry over vince carter because stats don't tell the entire story? Or do you mean intangibles, in which case, disregard this post.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

cpawfan said:


> Stats never tell the entire story


no they don't. but when one players stats are that much better(and they still are when adjusted for 48 minutes), it does tell something.


----------



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

hirschmanz said:


> better rebounder - VC
> better scorer - VC
> better passer - VC
> better defender - wash
> ...


Yeah, if Vince will be in the Spurs, who is going to take it to rim. I doubt Vince. I wonder who has the balls, to go after the ball. I doubt Vince. Who is going to do a big play, I doubt Vince. Who is going to play expectacular defense. I doubt Vince. Vince is a little girl, that has no Championship heart, the man is a flake.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

hirschmanz said:


> no, but would you take brent barry over vince carter because stats don't tell the entire story? Or do you mean intangibles, in which case, disregard this post.


In addition to intangibles, you also have to consider how players fit in with their teams and what they are asked to do by their teams.

In this comparison, you have 2 players that have their lives made much easier by playing with the best at their respective positions. In Vince's case, he was asked to be the primary scorer when RJ went down and was given the green light to shoot at will, so his stats will appear far more impressive.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

rocketeer said:


> no they don't. but when one players stats are that much better(and they still are when adjusted for 48 minutes), it does tell something.


It tells me that you need to look at each player's role on their team.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

DWadeistheTruth said:


> Yeah, if Vince will be in the Spurs, who is going to take it to rim.


Tony parker


DWadeistheTruth said:


> I wonder who has the balls, to go after the ball.


Any other player on the spurs, pick one.



DWadeistheTruth said:


> Who is going to do a big play?


Robert Horry


DWadeistheTruth said:


> Who is going to play expectacular defense.


expectacular? Bruce Bowen and Tim Duncan


Vince is a different player from manu, a much better basketball player. As you pointed out, he hasnt shown the same level of heart as manu, but on the spurs, there is no lack of heart.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

BenGordon said:


> It might not be everyone, but the Net General fanbase has welcomed openly their division rival. do u think the red sox would want A-rod on their team? do u think the redskins would want roy williams? would the lakers want c-webb?


 I think the Knicks would be considered in the same category, since they would wanted Michael Jordan in his prime (those New York newspapers always had a rumor about him going to the Knicks). When exactly have the nets taken the Raptors as serious rivals? Vince Carter and the raptors were never close with the Nets when they made their finals run. This rivalry you speak of is nonexistent to me. 

Football is different from basketball, in my opinion anyways, in that the rivalry between is much more heated. I think the rivalries in football outnumber those in basketball. BTW, as a Redskins fan, I would love if the Cowboys would trade Roy Williams for Matt Bowen (Taylor and Williams would be sick!!!); heck I would take Aikman in the nineties over the quarterbacks that the Redskins have since 92. I wouldn't mind if the Redskins picked up Corey Simon(just released by the Eagles). The Redskins picked up Cornelius Griffin from the Giants, while the Giants picked up Antonio Pierce from Washington. 

Then again, I draw the line at Michael Irvin and Neon Deion.

BTW... I think Carter is better than Ginobili and not by much. Even though Carter has better numbers, you also have to take into account the Jason Kidd factor. I think that Ginobili is definetely a much better defender with his floppy tactics, as cheap as they are. 

Still, even if Carter is at best an average defender, he still commands the double team and has a better all around game. As great as Manu can be, he is also inconsistent from game to game as indicated by the NBA finals. Even though Ginobili has been in the league for a shorter period of time, they are around the same age (Carter is 6 months older than Manu).


----------



## X-Factor (Aug 24, 2004)

I'm not a huge fan of either player, but if you watch these guys play, there's got to be no doubt in your mind that VC is a better, and more valuable player then Manu. Okay, I'm a little tired with peoples "Titles, Titles!" argument. Robert Horry is a fine player, but would be immortal if we always used that argument. Sure Manu won titles with San Antonio, but he was arguably the third option on his team.


----------



## The_Black_Pinoy (Jul 6, 2005)

Drewbs said:


> Anyone who says Manu doesn't know a thing about basketball.


Agreed.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

cpawfan said:


> It tells me that you need to look at each player's role on their team.


does their role on their team not also relate to their ability as a basketball player?


----------



## VCFSO2000 (Apr 10, 2005)

DWadeistheTruth said:


> Yeah, if Vince will be in the Spurs, who is going to take it to rim. I doubt Vince. I wonder who has the balls, to go after the ball. I doubt Vince. Who is going to do a big play, I doubt Vince. Who is going to play expectacular defense. I doubt Vince. Vince is a little girl, that has no Championship heart, the man is a flake.


The funny things are:

1)It is clear that your judgement is clouded by your hatred for Vince.

2)And the things you just mentioned,are things Jerome Williams does.

So why is Manu so special in your eyes?

I've never seen Manu play at the NBA level,on a team where he was the focal point of the offense,let alone VC's situation last year,and put up major numbers.

You guys are so clouded by wins that are racked up with 12 men rosters.

F'N disgusting.


----------



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

VCFSO2000 said:


> The funny things are:
> 
> 1)It is clear that your judgement is clouded by your hatred for Vince.
> 
> ...


Argentina has the greatest talent in the world. Right, gold medal. Right. So I guess Manu had so much talent around him in Argentina.


----------



## VCFSO2000 (Apr 10, 2005)

DWadeistheTruth said:


> Argentina has the greatest talent in the world. Right, gold medal. Right. So I guess Manu had so much talent around him in Argentina.


You're talking about the argentinian team that benefited from americans' underestimation of everybody.


----------



## tone wone (Jan 30, 2003)

DWadeistheTruth said:


> Argentina has the greatest talent in the world. Right, gold medal. Right. So I guess Manu had so much talent around him in Argentina.


 actually yea...

see you're oversimplifying things. Also, you're reaching bringing up international competition...this is the argument for those who have nothing else to argue..

Vince Carter is a better basketball than Manu Ginobili....Greg Popovich(sp?) would probably same thing if you asked him


----------



## Kneejoh (Dec 21, 2004)

tone wone said:


> Vince Carter is a better basketball than Manu Ginobili....Greg Popovich(sp?) would probably same thing if you asked him


Even Manu himself would admit hes not better than Vince.


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> The last 2 head coaches for the Steelers played for the Browns. Not every fan shares your limited view.


but not of any signifacance in their team history. my point is, a loyal team doesnt applaud former rivals as openly as the nets fan did VC. not only do they welcome em but also a lot of the raptor fanbase converted to a net fan. but maybe it just because NBA aint as loyal a game as baseball and football, but i still expect Jazz Fans to boo if MJ and Pippen come as guests to a home game.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

thug_immortal8 said:


> Even Manu himself would admit hes not better than Vince.


good point, but I think that has more to do with humility.


----------



## Kneejoh (Dec 21, 2004)

I don't like Carter at all, and Air Fly and VCFSO2000 will confirm that for you, I actually despise the guy.

But I am not blind, I can see who is the better player, this isn't a thread where its a wash and you say, " Well Player A averages 25/5/6 and Player B averages 26/4/6." In that case most of us go for the player we like more, this is different, one player average 25/6/6 the other 16/6/6. I don't care what league or team or any other factor, the one player is clearly better than the other. In this case Vince is better than Manu, I dare you to find one unbiased Spurs fan that will say otherwise.


----------



## VCFSO2000 (Apr 10, 2005)

thug_immortal8 said:


> *I don't like Carter at all, and Air Fly and VCFSO2000 will confirm that for you, I actually despise the guy.*
> But I am not blind, I can see who is the better player, this isn't a thread where its a wash and you say, " Well Player A averages 25/5/6 and Player B averages 26/4/6." In that case most of us go for the player we like more, this is different, one player average 25/6/6 the other 16/6/6. I don't care what league or team or any other factor, the one player is clearly better than the other. In this case Vince is better than Manu, I dare you to find one unbiased Spurs fan that will say otherwise.


Lol I know.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

BenGordon said:


> but not of any signifacance in their team history. my point is, a loyal team doesnt applaud former rivals as openly as the nets fan did VC. not only do they welcome em but also a lot of the raptor fanbase converted to a net fan. but maybe it just because NBA aint as loyal a game as baseball and football, but i still expect Jazz Fans to boo if MJ and Pippen come as guests to a home game.


You obviously don't understand the Browns / Steeler rivalry. When Cowher played for the Browns, some of his parents possession (they lived in Pittsburgh) were damaged each year when the teams played.

As I and others have pointed out already, the Raptors and the Nets were never rivals. If you remember, until the past season, Toronto wasn't even in the same Division as the Nets.

On top of that, Vince has many, many fans that are Vince fans first. Yes these fans mostly stopped following the Raptors, but many of them weren't Raptors fans in the sense that you are talking about.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

rocketeer said:


> does their role on their team not also relate to their ability as a basketball player?


It can, but not necessarily. The Nets needed Vince to take a ton of shots because RJ was out. The Spurs need Manu to take over games at critical points.

Like I said before, give me Vince in the regular season, but in the playoffs, especially when a title is on the line, I'll take Manu. Manu just has that special gear.


----------



## Noodfan (Jun 25, 2005)

Topic maker is the same guy right who says VC is soft?
Did Vc do something to your sister? Why grudge?


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

cpawfan said:


> It can, but not necessarily. The Nets needed Vince to take a ton of shots because RJ was out. The Spurs need Manu to take over games at critical points.
> 
> Like I said before, give me Vince in the regular season, but in the playoffs, especially when a title is on the line, I'll take Manu. Manu just has that special gear.


on the spurs, manu never has to take over games. he does on occasion, but it's not something they need from him. if manu is hot, they can feed it to him. if not, they can pass it inside to duncan.

there's not exactly the same luxury with vince. yes he has kidd getting him the ball, but in his earlier years without kidd, he was still putting up these huge numbers. and it's not like vince hasn't had big playoff performance. i remember him and iverson trading huge games in the conference finals one year. he just hasn't had as many chances in the postseason because the raptors haven't been as good as the spurs.


----------



## THE MATRIX 31 (Jul 22, 2005)

None of yall understand, except maybe Spurs fans, that Manu doesnt miss when it matters. VC is a superstar yes, but in this years playoffs, he disgusted me. Hes not clutch at all. Except for that shot that rattled the rim and finally dropped to send it into to OT (luck), he sucks when it matters. I know all u Nets fans are gonna start crying and attack me now, but just face it.Id rather have Manu on my squad.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

THE MATRIX 31 said:


> None of yall understand, except maybe Spurs fans, that Manu doesnt miss when it matters. VC is a superstar yes, but in this years playoffs, he disgusted me. Hes not clutch at all. Except for that shot that rattled the rim and finally dropped to send it into to OT (luck), he sucks when it matters. I know all u Nets fans are gonna start crying and attack me now, but just face it.Id rather have Manu on my squad.


good points, but without VC the nets arent in the playoffs, without manu, the spurs are still a contender.


----------



## JCB (Aug 9, 2005)

i dont think this debate is gunna end anytime soon


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

Chaser 55 said:


> i dont think this debate is gunna end anytime soon


once VC takes the nets deep into the playoffs.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

rocketeer said:


> on the spurs, manu never has to take over games. he does on occasion, but it's not something they need from him. if manu is hot, they can feed it to him. if not, they can pass it inside to duncan.
> 
> there's not exactly the same luxury with vince. yes he has kidd getting him the ball, but in his earlier years without kidd, he was still putting up these huge numbers. and it's not like vince hasn't had big playoff performance. i remember him and iverson trading huge games in the conference finals one year. he just hasn't had as many chances in the postseason because the raptors haven't been as good as the spurs.


There is no point is bringing up the old Vince in this conversation. Vince put up stats while playing with Kidd which is entirely different.

And yes, the Spurs need Manu to win games for them at times. That is part of what he brings to the Spurs.


----------



## JCB (Aug 9, 2005)

hirschmanz said:


> once VC takes the nets deep into the playoffs.


o man . . . we haven't even gotten the season started yet . . . this debate is gunna last a long time then lol


----------



## Long John Silver (Jun 14, 2005)

Carter is a better offensive player, and slightly better overall. That being said, I'll take Manu on my team.


----------



## tone wone (Jan 30, 2003)

THE MATRIX 31 said:


> None of yall understand, except maybe Spurs fans, that Manu doesnt miss when it matters. VC is a superstar yes, but in this years playoffs, he disgusted me. Hes not clutch at all. Except for that shot that rattled the rim and finally dropped to send it into to OT (luck), he sucks when it matters. I know all u Nets fans are gonna start crying and attack me now, but just face it.Id rather have Manu on my squad.


 Vince has only been in the playoffs three times in his career....2000 & 2001 with the raptors and this past season with new jesery..

in 2000 his performance was subpar compared to the regular although it was a little overblown cause of the hype he had at the time. In 01 he balled out of his mind and this past season he underperformed. 

Three playoff apperances is too small of a sample to label a player.

so for the 2nd time....Vince Carter is a better basketball player than Manu Ginobili..whether its playoff, regular season, pre-season, international or all-star games


----------



## VCFSO2000 (Apr 10, 2005)

A scene based off one in ''The godfather part III''

*Vince's spokesman:*Vince Carter's arrival to NJ singlehandedly rejuvenated Jason Kidd,thus rejuvenating the franchise.

_A reporter interrupts_

*Reporter:*How about his weak performance in the playoffs against MIA?

*Vince's spokesman:*As I was saying,Carter averaged 27ppg in New Jersey,giving them that consistent half-court scorer they've never had in the Jason Kidd era.

*Reporter:*What about his startling and alarming injury history?I think it would be fair to say he was soft.

*Vince's spokesman:*Hey,cut the crap,huh?A.I and Kidd said Carter was tough,you think you know better than his peers?


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Personal bias, I would take Manu. Surprise surprise right? 


Carter is insanely talented, moreso than Ginobili. I like Manu's mental aspects and his willingness to be a 2nd and even 3rd option offensively. Plus, you know Manu is going to play hard every night.


----------



## Thievery Corporation (Jul 2, 2005)

You are the first person in the world to compare VC to Ginobili. They don't have a damn thing in common in their playing styles.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

emanuel isn't better than vince, but the thing is, i think dwade knew that the whole time.


----------



## VCFSO2000 (Apr 10, 2005)

sherako said:


> emanuel isn't better than vince, but the thing is, i think dwade knew that the whole time.


I know.


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

I don't like either of them, but if I had to choose between the two, I'd take Carter.
They're both good players, that offer different things, but I don't think Ginobili's on Carter's level.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

Ginobili will never see a double team in his life. Vince is relied on to carry his team's offense. Ginobili is a 2nd fiddle at best.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

If Vince played next to Duncan he'd look like Superman.


----------



## couchman (Dec 20, 2004)

If I was picking guys for 1on1 I'd take Carter.

But for TEAM basketball give me Ginobili every time.

Carter is more talented, but Ginobili does all the little things that lead to victory.

And Ginobili is the most clutch player in the NBA. He takes over games when it matters most. 

http://www.82games.com/clutchplay3.htm

Carter is a choker who has shrivelled up every time his team has been in the playoffs. 

Ginobili is also way ahead of Carter in the Roland Ratings,( +15.5 vs + 10.9)

The two players are virtually tied in efficiency per 48 min (+28.26 for carter vs +27.95 for ginobili)


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

GrandKenyon6 said:


> Ginobili will never see a double team in his life. Vince is relied on to carry his team's offense. Ginobili is a 2nd fiddle at best.


There is a serious semantical difference between being allowed to take a lot of shots and carrying the offense. Vince can be a primary offensive weapon, but he isn't anything better than a 2nd fiddle on a team that wins. Vince is only a 1st fiddle on a team headed nowhere.


----------



## Chris Bosh #4 (Feb 18, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> I'd take Vince during the regular season and Manu during the playoffs.


HAHAHA! You've got to be kidding me? Vince Carter is clutch! One of the most clutch players ever IMO. All coming from a Raptors fan who got to see the best of Vince.


----------



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

Taking D Wade out of the equation of guards, this also includes T Mac and Iverson here goes.

1Kobe
2Iverson
3T Mac 
4Manu
5 Ray Allen
6 Paul Pierce
7 Vince Carter
8 Michael Redd
9 Rip Hamilton
This are the top 10 cause you know who is number one.


----------



## ly_yng (Jul 9, 2005)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not discounting the Kidd effect, but Ginobli gets to play next to the Big Fundamental. Duncan is, quite possibly, the best power forward of all time. People are still debating on whether Kidd makes the top 5 PGs. 

Short of Shaq, no-one changes the fabric of the game like Duncan does. Manu gets to play a different brand of basketball than Carter, so of course it will be easier for him to make "clutch" shots. At the end of a game, if you're playing the Nets, you have to watch for Carter first, and everyone else second (at least when Jefferson was hurt). Against the Spurs, your primary concern is keeping Duncan from scoring. Ginobli will naturally get easier looks because of this.

This is why this whole "Ginobli is a winner" argument is such a joke. Last I checked, Carter and Manu each had 1 Gold Medal. And just cause I hop on a triathelete's back doesn't mean I can run a marathon. Ginobli got his rings by suiting up next to the best thing since sliced bread (an accurate description of his personality, too). You throw the kid on the Raptors, he's not winning a damn thing.

Also, since when is Ginobli a shut down defender? And since when is Carter terrible? I certainly give the edge to Manu, but it's not like we're comparing Michael Cooper to Pete Maravich or something.

Neither of these guys can carry a team by himself, but Carter has the rare ability to put points on the board, even when everyone knows that he's getting the ball. Until Ginobli leads a Duncan-less Spurs into and through the playoffs, he's just a Very Good Player, but not a great one.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

ly_yng said:


> Don't get me wrong, I'm not discounting the Kidd effect, but Ginobli gets to play next to the Big Fundamental. Duncan is, quite possibly, the best power forward of all time. People are still debating on whether Kidd makes the top 5 PGs.
> 
> Short of Shaq, no-one changes the fabric of the game like Duncan does. Manu gets to play a different brand of basketball than Carter, so of course it will be easier for him to make "clutch" shots. At the end of a game, if you're playing the Nets, you have to watch for Carter first, and everyone else second (at least when Jefferson was hurt). Against the Spurs, your primary concern is keeping Duncan from scoring. Ginobli will naturally get easier looks because of this.
> 
> ...


Great post. Exactly right.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

One player played next to a player that his arguably on his last legs, the other played with the best basketball player in the league. Now switch those roles and see if this comparison even comes close


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Chris Bosh #4 said:


> HAHAHA! You've got to be kidding me? Vince Carter is clutch! One of the most clutch players ever IMO. All coming from a Raptors fan who got to see the best of Vince.


Some people just started watching Vince in 2005, of course they dont know that aspect of his game.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

KokoTheMonkey said:


> Carter is insanely talented, moreso than Ginobili. I like Manu's mental aspects and his willingness to be a 2nd and even 3rd option offensively. Plus, you know Manu is going to play hard every night.


Exactly right. Looks like the Vince hype is back in full effect. Sigh. Ginobili is worlds better as a defender, will never slack off for even a play, let alone a whole season. Ginobili is a smarter basketball player, is mentally tougher, and is willing to defer for the sake of team success. You want to talk about guards I would take over Ginobili? Let's talk about Kobe, McGrady, Wade, Ray Allen, etc. Vince Carter? Unbelievable. I want players that care about winning, because that takes you a long way as a player. Vince Carter just doesn't care about winning half as much as Ginobili, and half is being generous. A tenth maybe?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

couchman said:


> If I was picking guys for 1on1 I'd take Carter.
> 
> But for TEAM basketball give me Ginobili every time.
> 
> ...



TEAM Duncan is my answer to this


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> Some people just started watching Vince in 2005, of course they dont know that aspect of his game.


Ah, the standard response. If someone doesn't think as highly of Vince as you do, they must not have been watching him enough.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> Ah, the standard response. If someone doesn't think as highly of Vince as you do, they must not have been watching him enough.


It's kind of weird too, you'd think it would be the other way around. If you just started watching basketball in 2005, you'd probably think Vince was amazing and much better. Anyone who has been watching basketball a long time can't possibly respect how much of his career he spent tanking.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

Vince is a guy who can come in and instantly give a team a half-court offense. Last year for the Nets, he literally produced 20 points a game more for the team when we didn't have him. Before he got to the team the Nets struggled to hit 80 (it was really, really pathetic, trust me). After Vince arrived 90s and 100 pt games abounded. And, we even lost RJ. That is the kind of talent and production that few people in the league can approach. And Manu isn't one of them.

However, Manu is clutch, plays solid D, and doesn't have Vince's history. So some people prefer him. Its only natural. But he's no where near the talent that Vince has, and he's never come close to his levels of production. Still, histories are histories. If Vince and the Nets play well and go deep in the playoffs for a few years, maybe Vince will outrun his past. For some people, though, probably not.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

SeaNet said:


> Vince is a guy who can come in and instantly give a team a half-court offense. Last year for the Nets, he literally produced 20 points a game more for the team when we didn't have him. Before he got to the team the Nets struggled to hit 80 (it was really, really pathetic, trust me). After Vince arrived 90s and 100 pt games abounded. And, we even lost RJ. That is the kind of talent and production that few people in the league can approach. And Manu isn't one of them.
> 
> However, Manu is clutch, plays solid D, and doesn't have Vince's history. So some people prefer him. Its only natural. But he's no where near the talent that Vince has, and he's never come close to his levels of production. Still, histories are histories. If Vince and the Nets play well and go deep in the playoffs for a few years, maybe Vince will outrun his past. For some people, though, probably not.


Even though I think your descriptions of Ginobili are understating his ability, this is a very fair post.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Even though I think your descriptions of Ginobili are understating his ability, this is a very fair post.


Thanks, man.


----------



## magic_bryant (Jan 11, 2004)

I take Ginobili's heart. I prefer heart and desire over any and EVERYTHING. If this question is based on who I want more on MY team, for the LONG haul. Yes, I take Ginobili. Ginobili has never shown a history to just "quit". He didn't do it in international play or NBA play. If Duncan goes down with injury, Manu pushes that much harder. 

Sure, VC played well with Kidd. But that doesn't change the fact that when put in a tough situation, he DID "mail it in". What happens if Kidd has a career-ending injury? Does VC just "mail it in" AGAIN? What if the team starts out 1-14? Does VC find a way to get "hurt" AGAIN? 

Manu has heart and desire. Two things MOST important in winning. VC has it when his team is playing well. Manu was labelled the Euro-Kobe 4 yrs ago for a reason. He's a 6'6" ATHLETIC SG with a "leave EVERYTHING on the court" type of attitude, who finishes AMAZINGLY difficult shots, type of player.

I'll take the player, who gives it his ALL every damn time he steps onto the court, over the more talented player. At least, I can count on him to play hard. Because NEITHER player is the kind of player that can take you to a title as the MAIN man. 

Neither guy is on the level of Kobe, T-Mac, Wade, and AI.


----------



## Pejavlade (Jul 10, 2004)

If I was starting a franchise right now I would take Manu over Carter.


----------



## MarionBarberThe4th (Jul 7, 2005)

Both good but Id take Vince. Vince is just a much more talented basketball player, simple as that IMO.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

couchman said:


> Carter is a choker who has shrivelled up every time his team has been in the playoffs.


that isn't true.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

DWadeistheTruth said:


> Taking D Wade out of the equation of guards, this also includes T Mac and Iverson here goes.
> 
> 1Kobe
> 2Iverson
> ...


that list really shouldn't even get a reply, but i'll give you one just to let you know that.


----------



## AsonKidd4mvp (Aug 13, 2005)

Carter is a far better player then Ginobli, not even close.


----------



## tone wone (Jan 30, 2003)

Pejavlade said:


> If I was starting a franchise right now I would take Manu over Carter.


 you must enjoy losing


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Even though I think your descriptions of Ginobili are understating his ability, this is a very fair post.


First of all, **** You! What do you know about basketball besides worshipping the entire Spurs players?

I dont bother to give detail analysis or you guys will look like fools on this thread.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

tone wone said:


> you must enjoy losing


U must as well, freaking T-mac fan but like never get out of first round for 7 8 years.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

cpawfan said:


> Ah, the standard response. If someone doesn't think as highly of Vince as you do, they must not have been watching him enough.


But prove me wrong because obviously with the comments you have made about him, you definitely havent seen enough of him or maybe your not acknowledging somethings about him.

Just a general question, if Manu had started out on the vancouver grizzlies or even the Atlanta Hawks, I wonder how much of this exposure or this so caleld 'heart' would be talked about


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

Pejavlade said:


> If I was starting a franchise right now I would take Manu over Carter.


and I'd take duncan over either of them. 

Manu may be a better lockerroom presence, team player, etc., but Vince is the better basketball player. Maybe we're just arguing different things. Those who support Vince say he's better at basketball, those who support manu say he gives more bang for his buck, is better for a team.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> But prove me wrong because obviously with the comments you have made about him, you definitely havent seen enough of him or maybe your not acknowledging somethings about him.


I have no clue what you are talking about. The biggest problem regarding Vince is that people want to talk about him being back and want to assume that 2005 Vince is like 2000 Vince.



> Just a general question, if Manu had started out on the vancouver grizzlies or even the Atlanta Hawks, I wonder how much of this exposure or this so caleld 'heart' would be talked about


Just as if Vince had been shipped to the Hornets last season, I wonder how much of this talk about him being back would exist.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> I have no clue what you are talking about. The biggest problem regarding Vince is that people want to talk about him being back and want to assume that 2005 Vince is like 2000 Vince.


And like I have said and will say again, the 2005 Vince is a much better player. He has a more accomplished jumpshot and reads the game better. Less highlights but a much improved game. No slight to Manu he is a fantastic player, very gutsy but I'll take Vince over him every single day of the week


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> And like I have said and will say again, the 2005 Vince is a much better player. He has a more accomplished jumpshot and reads the game better. Less highlights but a much improved game. No slight to Manu he is a fantastic player, very gutsy but I'll take Vince over him every single day of the week


And like I have said and will say again, the 2005 Vince may be a better shooter, but he significantly benefitted from his environment. The 2000 Vince was an NBA Superstar and the 2005 Vince is simply one of the better wings in the NBA.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> And like I have said and will say again, the 2005 Vince may be a better shooter, but he significantly benefitted from his environment. The 2000 Vince was an NBA Superstar and the 2005 Vince is simply one of the better wings in the NBA.


Once again bringing up my point that you havent seen enough Vince games since you obviously think the 2000 Vince is better than the current one. Let me take a quote from Butch Carter during his earlier seasons, "Vince is playing at 75% right now, if he ever gets it all together he will stun the league". And the environment you are mentioning consists of J.Kidd, a pg who has never been known to score and a bunch of scrubs. Your right though, Vince still has quite some convincing to do that he deserves to be called a superstar, but I have no doubt in my mind that this current Vince is a much better player than the earlier one, his understanding of the game is so much different


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

John said:


> First of all, **** You! What do you know about basketball besides worshipping the entire Spurs players?


First of all, **** you! What do you know about basketball besides worshipping Penny and Carter? 

I'll save detailed analysis so I don't make you look like a fool.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

f22egl said:


> As great as Manu can be, he is also inconsistent from game to game as indicated by the NBA finals.


Carter is more inconsistant than manu. what the hell did carter do in the 1st round? nothing! manu stepped up his game. and look at the oerall picture in the detroit series. those numbers are greater than anything most other "star guards" have done this year in the playoffs. carter doesn't do the little things to help his team win. he isn't as clutch as manu. doesn't have as much heart. doesn't want to win as badly. has had a longer time in the league to prove himself and hasn't. doesn't shoot as good a percentage as manu. doesn't play with the intensity gino plays with. he isn't ready


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

duncan2k5 said:


> Carter is more inconsistant than manu. what the hell did carter do in the 1st round? nothing! manu stepped up his game. and look at the oerall picture in the detroit series. those numbers are greater than anything most other "star guards" have done this year in the playoffs. carter doesn't do the little things to help his team win. he isn't as clutch as manu. doesn't have as much heart. doesn't want to win as badly. has had a longer time in the league to prove himself and hasn't. doesn't shoot as good a percentage as manu. doesn't play with the intensity gino plays with. he isn't ready


I wasnt going to post in this thread till i saw this post..

First of all, if this is your logic..

*"Carter is more inconsistent than Manu, what the hell did he do in the 1st round? nothing! manu stepped up his game. and look at the oerall picture in the detroit series. those numbers are greater than anything most other "star guards" have done this year in the playoffs"*

Then i must say Manu is much better player than Tmac, Lebron and Kobe (after all the last two didnt make the playoffs , and Tmac havent got out of the 1st round yet again) but its completley false.

These guys and Vince Carter are the #1 option for their teams, while Manu is just a role player and the spurs dosent set their game plan around him. They have someone called "Tim Duncan" who makes it much easier for him by the way, so just to make it clear he is not "the man" on the spurs team while the other guys are.

Now i wanna break down couple of your points..

*carter doesn't do the little things to help his team win*

Thats because he's not a role player, those little things you're talking about are things that role players like "Manu" do and he does it with perfection, i can never take that away from him. 
*
"he isn't as clutch as manu"
*
If you ask raptors fans (even tho they dislike him for what he did to them) they'll tell you Vince is as clutch as you want your player to be. He's been knows as clutch through out his career, and he showed that with NJ (Miami heat series) He also take over games in the 4th quartar when games on the line and when his team needs him the most.

Manu as far as i know does have someone on his team that other teams fear most "Tim Duncan" which takes alot of pressure off him and prevent other teams from doubling him like they do with Carter. So i dont think this is even close on who's more clutch.

*"doesn't have as much heart"*

Allen Iverson: "people say Vince is soft and has no heart, pssh give me Vince i'll play with him"

Jason Kidd: "I'll go with Vince to battle at any time"

I hope this makes you change your mind about the "heart" thing.

*"doesn't shoot as good a percentage as manu"*

Manu: FG% .471 3P% .376
Carter: FG% .452 3P% .406

I think Carter is a better shooter cuz he actually was being doubled/tripled at times with NJ and was the only scoring option for his team..and its not really easy to have such good % facing that just ask Kobe.

Now if i may ask, who woud you rather have on a Bobcats team *no offense* a player who averages 16 ppg on a team with a superstar and had never experienced the task of being the #1 option on an nba team before *Or *a guy who's a proven all-star, go to go scorer in this league (20+ ppg every season) a guy who can drop 40-50pts for you at any given night, and once lead his team to East Semi all by himself as the #1 option? People who are unbias will give the right answer.

One more thing, the Nets would never trade Carter for Manu in a one-on-one swap...but IMO the Spurs would do it plus hand out NJ couple of scrub players and maybe cash.

Now to answer this thread question! there is no doubt Carter is all-around better player than Manu and it isnt even close IMO whether in the playoffs or regular season.


----------



## The_Black_Pinoy (Jul 6, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> *"doesn't have as much heart"*
> 
> Allen Iverson: "people say Vince is soft and has no heart, pssh give me Vince i'll play with him"
> 
> ...




For the people who hate Carter It probably would not, but I will listen to NBA player’s opinions of their peers, before fans who think they know what they are talking about.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

The_Black_Pinoy said:


> For the people who hate Carter It probably would not, *but I will listen to NBA player’s opinions of their peers, before fans who think they know what they are talking about.*


Im on the same path as you are :wink:


----------



## Nuzzo (Jul 11, 2005)

Someone is *owned*
:dpepper: :dpepper: :dpepper: :dpepper:


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> Once again bringing up my point that you havent seen enough Vince games since you obviously think the 2000 Vince is better than the current one. Let me take a quote from Butch Carter during his earlier seasons, "Vince is playing at 75% right now, if he ever gets it all together he will stun the league". And the environment you are mentioning consists of J.Kidd, a pg who has never been known to score and a bunch of scrubs. Your right though, Vince still has quite some convincing to do that he deserves to be called a superstar, but I have no doubt in my mind that this current Vince is a much better player than the earlier one, his understanding of the game is so much different


Vince, like any good players, has become a better technical basketball player, however, because of what he has gone through physically, he isn't a better NBA player than he was in 2000. In 2000 he was one of the best wings in the NBA and now he is only a very good wing. If Vince didn't adapt his game and get better at the technical aspects, he would be an above average wing.

And yes, Vince is playing with Jason Kidd, a point guard that makes everyone around him better. Kidd is the difference between Vince averaging 21 PPG and 27 PPG. At 27 PPG, Vince fans talk about him being at the same level as TMac and Kobe.


----------



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

tone wone said:


> you must enjoy losing


You must not like winners.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Sigh* I dont even know why am trying to explain this. The big difference between the 2000 Vince and the current Vince is the fact that he is not trying to dunk on everything that stands in his way, know why cause those stuff are uneccessary. Does economy of motion apply to your vocabulary. You stick firmly to your belief that he cant be compared to the Kobes & Tmacs yet everytime he steps on court he gets EXACTLY the same kind of focus they get on the court. Sigh if only Vince could get the Manu treatment am sure things would be so much easier on him. I wish teams would really give him a good wing player treatment instead of the superstar triple and double teams.

And please stop overrating this Kidd-Carter combination thingy, its getting old. Kidd yes did influence Vince, but its more mental than anything else. The season before last Vince did average close to 23/5/5 ya know, oh wait a minute he had Jason Kidd right! Vince was putting up numbers before he played with kidd, dont forget that


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

> And please stop overrating this Kidd-Carter combination thingy, its getting old. Kidd yes did influence Vince, but its more mental than anything else.


the game is purely mental for players of vincent's caliber. that's the way it should be played at the topmost of echelons.


----------



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

duncan2k5 said:


> Carter is more inconsistant than manu. what the hell did carter do in the 1st round? nothing! manu stepped up his game. and look at the oerall picture in the detroit series. those numbers are greater than anything most other "star guards" have done this year in the playoffs.* carter doesn't do the little things to help his team win*. he isn't as clutch as manu. doesn't have as much heart. doesn't want to win as badly. has had a longer time in the league to prove himself and hasn't. doesn't shoot as good a percentage as manu. doesn't play with the intensity gino plays with. he isn't ready


This is the whole point of the thread. Anyone that votes for Carter, never watches Championship caliber basketball. Were scoring is not always the top priority. Guts, Defense, intelligence, able to perform under pressure. Having the mental makeup, not to quit, unlike that fraud Vince Carter.


----------



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> I wasnt going to post in this thread till i saw this post..
> 
> First of all, if this is your logic..
> 
> ...


Remember he was the number one option in Toronto. Or did we forget that. Michael Jordan did the little things, he did not look for the role players to help him win. Vince is the biggest fraud today in sports.


----------



## mauzer (Jun 7, 2005)

DWadeistheTruth said:


> This is the whole point of the thread. Anyone that votes for Carter, never watches Championship caliber basketball. Were scoring is not always the top priority. Guts, Defense, intelligence, able to perform under pressure. Having the mental makeup, not to quit, unlike that fraud Vince Carter.


 :clap:


----------



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

The_Black_Pinoy said:


> For the people who hate Carter It probably would not, but I will listen to NBA player’s opinions of their peers, before fans who think they know what they are talking about.


Yeah the same players that go to party's together, and strip clubs. If my boy sucks, I still defend him. Is part of being boys. It be different if it was coaches. They are better at making such and assessment.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

dwadestruth do you even know what your arguing about


----------



## The_Black_Pinoy (Jul 6, 2005)

DWadeistheTruth said:


> Yeah the same players that go to party's together, and strip clubs. If my boy sucks, I still defend him. Is part of being boys. It be different if it was coaches. They are better at making such and assessment.



I did not know AI and Carter partied and when to strip clubs with each other. They play against each other and they know each other games much better than you think you do. Using championships rings as reasoning to say one player is better than another is easily revealing the ignorance in your posts.


----------



## The_Black_Pinoy (Jul 6, 2005)

Hbwoy said:


> And please stop overrating this Kidd-Carter combination thingy, its getting old.



Its been getting old for a long time now.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> Sigh* I dont even know why am trying to explain this. The big difference between the 2000 Vince and the current Vince is the fact that he is not trying to dunk on everything that stands in his way, know why cause those stuff are uneccessary. Does economy of motion apply to your vocabulary.


No, the 2000 Vince was a better athlete and far more explosive. He was able to dominate because of his athleticism. He is now a better technical basketball player, which includes being a better shooter and a better passer.

It isn't about economy of motion, it is about Vince not being able to do some of the things he could do 5 years ago. Vince has adapted.



> You stick firmly to your belief that he cant be compared to the Kobes & Tmacs yet everytime he steps on court he gets EXACTLY the same kind of focus they get on the court. Sigh if only Vince could get the Manu treatment am sure things would be so much easier on him. I wish teams would really give him a good wing player treatment instead of the superstar triple and double teams.


Vince got that much attention because of the Nets team. Vince was the primary offensive option and the second option was a point guard that is known to have shooting issues and then a rookie center. 

There is a major difference between being a superstar and being a primary offensive option with no other players offensively close to him in the starting lineup.



> And please stop overrating this Kidd-Carter combination thingy, its getting old. Kidd yes did influence Vince, but its more mental than anything else. The season before last Vince did average close to 23/5/5 ya know, oh wait a minute he had Jason Kidd right! Vince was putting up numbers before he played with kidd, dont forget that


Vince scored 5 PPG more with Kidd than he did last season with the raptors and I said Kidd was worth 6 PPG to Vince's average. 23 still isn't superstar wing, it is a very good wing.

Which numbers of Vince's do you want to talk about? Anything from 2000 or 2001 doesn't count because Vince was a different player.

I'm not overrating anything, rather you are underrating the impact of Kidd on Carter. Even if it is mostly mental, that still means Vince wouldn't do as well without him.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

The_Black_Pinoy said:


> Its been getting old for a long time now.


Sorry that the truth about Vince hurts so much.

Vince is a very good NBA wing and while paired with Kidd produced at a top level. As a Nets fan, I'm happy about that.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> Vince got that much attention because of the Nets team. Vince was the primary offensive option and the second option was a point guard that is known to have shooting issues and then a rookie center.





> There is a major difference between being a superstar and being a primary offensive option with no other players offensively close to him in the starting lineup.


You make very nice points, but I guess we have to wait till next season when Vince is paired with RJ and a developing Kristic all capable scorers. Then we will see if teams can afford to play him straight up one on one, or in your terms ' good wing' player conditions. I can almost guarantee that he will see as much doubles and triples as do Kobe and Tmac


----------



## The_Black_Pinoy (Jul 6, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> Sorry that the truth about Vince hurts so much.


Just because you believe it does not make it the truth. Kidd is not the majcian you make him out to be.


----------



## Chris Bosh #4 (Feb 18, 2005)

Vince Carter as a Rap carried the team for so many years. He was so clutch, great shooter, dunker, passer, and rebounder. Who ever says he's a chocker has never watched him. He's even clutch to this VERY day.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

The_Black_Pinoy said:


> Just because you believe it does not make it the truth. Kidd is not the majcian you make him out to be.


Vince isn't the player you make him out to be.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Chris Bosh #4 said:


> Vince Carter as a Rap *carried the team for so many years.* He was so clutch, great shooter, dunker, passer, and rebounder. Who ever says he's a chocker has never watched him. He's even clutch to this VERY day.


Please define so many years


----------



## AsonKidd4mvp (Aug 13, 2005)

Kidd doesnt even make Vince that much better like he does with RJ considering Vince scores all his points on isolations creating for HIMSELF, unlike an RJ who has Kidd spoon feed him on the break for all his points.


----------



## The_Black_Pinoy (Jul 6, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> Vince isn't the player you make him out to be.



A player that has been given a misrepresented tag of being soft yet he is still one of the best SG's in the league (Top 5). That has the ability to take over a game at will. However, due to ever so lacking supporting cast throughout his NBA Career, he has been unable to carry his respective teams very far into the playoffs. Thats what I make him out to be.


----------



## The_Black_Pinoy (Jul 6, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> I'd take Vince during the regular season and Manu during the playoffs.


If Manu was on the nets during our playoff run, instead of Vince, how far do you think we would have gotten? Just as you claim Vince benefits from the situation, he is in with Kidd, does it not go the same for Manu and Duncan.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

AsonKidd4mvp said:


> Kidd doesnt even make Vince that much better like he does with RJ considering Vince scores all his points on isolations creating for HIMSELF, unlike an RJ who has Kidd spoon feed him on the break for all his points.


Lets try some facts

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

Through games of 3/29. Kidd and Vince played 46 games together. So 143 Assists divided by 46 games is 3.1 APG from Kidd to Vince.

So that is at least 6 PPG games that Kidd gave to Vince.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

The_Black_Pinoy said:


> A player that has been given a misrepresented tag of being soft yet he is still one of the best SG's in the league (Top 5). That has the ability to take over a game at will. However, due to ever so lacking supporting cast throughout his NBA Career, he has been unable to carry his respective teams very far into the playoffs. Thats what I make him out to be.


SG? Vince is a wing that can play either position and has been voted to the all-star team as a forward. If you limit it to SG's, you take out players like TMac & LeBron.

Vince is a primary offensive player, but is best served as a supporting player on a team. He can't handle the leadership role.


----------



## AsonKidd4mvp (Aug 13, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> Lets try some facts
> 
> http://www.82games.com/feeders.htm
> 
> ...


Kidd passes the ball to Vince and he nails the jumper. Kidd will get credited with the assist even if all his work was handing Vince the ball off for a contested jumper. I think thats a credit to Vince's talent in making the jumper rather then Kidd handing to the ball off to him.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

cpawfan said:


> Lets try some facts
> 
> http://www.82games.com/feeders.htm
> 
> ...



But who else exactly would Kidd rather pass to on that team. Its easy for a pg to rack up assists when playing with a guy like Vince. Last I checked Vince was the one that made those shots not Kidd. Or lemme guess Kidd also has that ability to direct the ball into the hole. Get real! Vince Carter is an offensive beast, any pg coulda done the same thing to a player who has an off the ball ability that Vince Carter possesses. LIke it or not Vince helped Kidd even more than he did, at least he didnt have to deal with the constant double and triple teams Vince was getting and got a ton of open shots from playing with Vince


----------



## The_Black_Pinoy (Jul 6, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> SG? Vince is a wing that can play either position and has been voted to the all-star team as a forward. If you limit it to SG's, you take out players like TMac & LeBron.
> 
> Vince is a primary offensive player, but is best served as a supporting player on a team. He can't handle the leadership role.


Can manu?


----------



## The_Black_Pinoy (Jul 6, 2005)

Cpawfan, by your logic any wing could replace Vince, and the Nets would be just fine if not better.


----------



## The_Black_Pinoy (Jul 6, 2005)

Hbwoy said:


> But who else exactly would Kidd rather pass to on that team.


Expanding on your question, who could Kidd past to other than Vince and Krstic who could make effective plays work?


----------



## nextghitman (Jul 17, 2005)

Manu Ginobili


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

The_Black_Pinoy said:


> If Manu was on the nets during our playoff run, instead of Vince, how far do you think we would have gotten? Just as you claim Vince benefits from the situation, he is in with Kidd, does it not go the same for Manu and Duncan.


Specifically for the Nets and without a fully recovered RJ, Vince was more valuable to the Nets than Manu would have been. The Nets team last season was poorly built and had many problems. They weren't going anywhere with their injuries.

On most teams, the reason I would take Manu is that he knows when to take over a game and has a special gear that he goes into at that point. Vince can go on offensive fluries, but that is a matter of him being on and scoring a lot in bunches, not a sense of timing that he has to take the game over. Manu does it in more ways than just scoring when he takes over.

Manu certainly benefits from playing with Duncan, but that has no impact on what I like about his game.


----------



## The One (Jul 10, 2005)

:clap:Vince Carter!!!:clap:


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

The_Black_Pinoy said:


> Cpawfan, by your logic any wing could replace Vince, and the Nets would be just fine if not better.


Not any wing, but any scoring all-star wing

And this isn't something that I haven't stated before


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> On most teams, the reason I would take Manu is that he knows when to take over a game and has a special gear that he goes into at that point


Theres a reason why Vince is called fourth quarter Carter ya know


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> But who else exactly would Kidd rather pass to on that team. Its easy for a pg to rack up assists when playing with a guy like Vince. Last I checked Vince was the one that made those shots not Kidd. Or lemme guess Kidd also has that ability to direct the ball into the hole. Get real! Vince Carter is an offensive beast, any pg coulda done the same thing to a player who has an off the ball ability that Vince Carter possesses. LIke it or not Vince helped Kidd even more than he did, at least he didnt have to deal with the constant double and triple teams Vince was getting and got a ton of open shots from playing with Vince


The same people that allowed Kidd to average 8.3 APG

Far fewer PG's could do what Kidd did than Wings that could do what Vince did. 

It amazes be how much it upsets you that I see Vince as only very good and not as a superstar.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> Theres a reason why Vince is called fourth quarter Carter ya know


Volume shooting isn't the same as taking a game over.

When was Vince 4th quarter Carter? 2000 and 2001?


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

The_Black_Pinoy said:


> Can manu?


Manu can handle the leadership role.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

^See why i say if you havent been watching him for the 7years he has been in the league, then you really dont have as strong a grasp as you think you have on the issue. Dont worry though NBA.com is quite easy to navigate


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> ^See why i say if you havent been watching him for the 7years he has been in the league, then you really dont have as strong a grasp as you think you have on the issue. Dont worry though NBA.com is quite easy to navigate


No, I am simply asking you to back up your statement.

When did he earn the nickname?
How many games did Vince win for the Raptors in 03-04 in the 4th quarter?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

cpawfan said:


> No, I am simply asking you to back up your statement.
> 
> When did he earn the nickname?
> How many games did Vince win for the Raptors in 03-04 in the 4th quarter?


Well of the top of my head, the pistons, cavs and hawks are three games that Vince exploded in the 4th. And that season he was notorious for bringing out his best in the 4th. Like I said you can read this things up on NBA.com or ESPN they arent very hard to find


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> Well of the top of my head, the pistons, cavs and hawks are three games that Vince exploded in the 4th. And that season he was notorious for bringing out his best in the 4th. Like I said you can read this things up on NBA.com or ESPN they arent very hard to find


I see, when in doubt, claim someone else hasn't watched Vince enough and run away.

Stats never tell the entire story, but a look at 82games.com indicates that Vince was simply a volume shooter in clutch situations. 

03-04 Clutch Stats 
03-04 Full Stats 

In clutch situations, Vince's stats per 48 minutes had him scoring 35.7 PPG. However his shooting was poor and much lower than his full season shooting.

Clutch 37.9 FG% and 39.9 eFG%
Full 41.9 FG% and 45.2 eFG%

He did step up his rebounding somewhat.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

lol I'll take my eyes and actual gameplay over 82games.com anyday


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> lol I'll take my eyes and actual gameplay over 82games.com anyday


So your eyes told you that Vince was a better shooter in the 4th quarter?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Excerpts from the 03-04 season:



> "Carter had 25 of his 39 points in the second half on Wednesday."
> 
> "It's my time," Carter said. "Kevin is putting the ball in my hands and letting me make decisions, which I'm comfortable with. There's something about the second half that I enjoy."
> 
> Raptors win 82-79 against Wizards





> "Vince played an outstanding game all around," O'Neill said. "He was really good defensively and I thought he did a good job on the boards.
> "He kept things alive, and that's what you want your superstar to do every night. You want him to control the game in a lot of ways.
> "Carter also tightened his defense on Miller, who went scoreless in the fourth quarter. The Nuggets missed 12 of their first 13 shots and trailed by as many as 17 points in the first quarter. Carter had 12 points during the run.
> Raptors win 89-76 against nuggets





> Carter forced overtime with a three-point play with 13.2 seconds left in regulation. He hit a twirling, over-the-shoulder layup over Glover and was fouled. His free throw tied it for the first time after the Hawks led throughout.
> 
> On the other end, Carter blocked a layup by Jason Terry, then recovered the ball and called timeout. Morris Peterson missed an off-balance shot from the corner at the buzzer.
> 
> Raptors win at Hawks 99-97 OT


In a philadephia win 93-80, 15 of 33 points in the 4th quarter to lead raps to win


Man I dont even know where to stop, I guess the eyes of the dudes that wrote this are also faulty. If theres one thing that am pretty sure about Vince is the fact that he comes big during clutch situations


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> Excerpts from the 03-04 season:
> 
> In a philadephia win 93-80, 15 of 33 points in the 4th quarter to lead raps to win
> 
> ...


Bravo on missing the point. Volume shooting in the 4th quarter isn't the same as being clutch. 

Nice quotes though on him making a shot and blocking a shot at the end of a game and then on improving his defense in the 4th. At least that is clutch.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

cpawfan said:


> Manu can handle the leadership role.


and you back that up how?

manu is a good player. he really is. but i haven't seen him prove he can lead an nba team. he's much too inconsistent for that in my eyes. for every great game, he has an equally unimpressive game.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

cpawfan said:


> Bravo on missing the point. Volume shooting in the 4th quarter isn't the same as being clutch.
> 
> Nice quotes though on him making a shot and blocking a shot at the end of a game and then on improving his defense in the 4th. At least that is clutch.


Which brings me to the ask the question what exactly is clutch, because in those cases I gave you of Vince his team would be in a situations where they were down by some pts, he had no choice but to how do you call it 'volume shoot', a certain player called PP does the same in the 4th and I dare anyone to say PP isnt clutch. As a star player you demand the ball when your team is in need. Now back to Ginobli, I dont remember the last time the spurs were down huge in the 4th and needed him to put up huge numbers, playing with TD gives him the opportunity to make or take those last min shots because face it, teams are more concerned in stopping the big man.


----------



## Ron Mexico (Feb 14, 2004)

a thread like this deserves a poll, I wonder who the majority voted for


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

what do ppl mean manu is inconsistant? every player has a bad game. i see kobe shoot well one game and bomb the other...but ppl never call him inconsistant. thats why you look at overall stats combined with intangibles and actual gameplay to tell who is better. vince is a quitter. manu is a warrior. now tell me who you would take to war with you. and those who say he is only good because of tim duncan, so i guess kobe was only good because of shaq, magic only good because of kareem, pippen only good because of michael. jut because tim duncan is on a team doesn't mean someone else on the tam can't be a great player


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

duncan2k5 said:


> what do ppl mean manu is inconsistant? every player has a bad game. i see kobe shoot well one game and bomb the other...but ppl never call him inconsistant. thats why you look at overall stats combined with intangibles and actual gameplay to tell who is better. vince is a quitter. manu is a warrior. now tell me who you would take to war with you. and those who say he is only good because of tim duncan, so i guess kobe was only good because of shaq, magic only good because of kareem, pippen only good because of michael. jut because tim duncan is on a team doesn't mean someone else on the tam can't be a great player


manu is inconsistent. as in he plays well sometimes and not others. is manu as good as kobe, magic, and pippen? no. he isn't close. tim duncan isn't what makes manu a good player. but tim duncan makes it much easier for manu(and everyone else on the spurs) to be good.


----------



## Nikos (Jun 5, 2002)

Manu was very consistent this season and even MORE consistent in the playoffs. Not sure where that myth came from. He has been very good all season and even better in the playoffs.

Manu is also a very good player in his own right, not purely because of Duncan. You don't get 21-6-4 on very efficient shooting in the playoffs just by playing with Duncan. Manu was the only Spur along with Horry to improve his stats in the playoffs. Duncan himself wasn't even his normal self, and the rest of the Spurs statistical outputs declined. So I would say Manu stepped up in his own right and was an excellent second banana to Duncan.

That being said, Vince Carter is the better standalone talent than Manu. Manu steps up in his second star role but that doesn't mean he is neccesarily BETTER. He is a better teamatte, better proffesional maybe if what is said about Vince quitting on his team is true. Manu probably UPS his game in the playoffs moreso than Vince, but Vince might be able to do the same if he were second fiddle to Tim. Each player plays different roles for their respective teams, and that makes it difficult for a fair comparison. But Vince IS the better talent.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Nikos said:


> Manu was very consistent this season and even MORE consistent in the playoffs. Not sure where that myth came from. He has been very good all season and even better in the playoffs.



The myth comes from him fluctuating as a starter and reserve over his career (and even briefly during the playoffs), and because people must think about Parker's inconsistency and relate it to Ginobili. 


Ginobili is consistent. He's not consistently great like on the Kobe/T-Mac/etc level, but he's consistently one of the better players on the floor every night. He's a guy that brings play making and energy, and those are two things that translate well into his performance every night. Maybe you could say his scoring is inconsistent because the Spurs do like to go with matchups and who's hot between Parker and Manu as the 2nd scorer, but when you shoot at nearly 50% from the floor and 40% from three it's hard to say you are inconsistent in that aspect.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> Which brings me to the ask the question what exactly is clutch, because in those cases I gave you of Vince his team would be in a situations where they were down by some pts, he had no choice but to how do you call it 'volume shoot', a certain player called PP does the same in the 4th and I dare anyone to say PP isnt clutch. As a star player you demand the ball when your team is in need. Now back to Ginobli, I dont remember the last time the spurs were down huge in the 4th and needed him to put up huge numbers, playing with TD gives him the opportunity to make or take those last min shots because face it, teams are more concerned in stopping the big man.


Clutch is for close situations. Being down big and the 4th and taking a ton of shots isn't clutch.

PP and Vince both shoot at a lower percentage and put up shots at a higher rate during clutch situations. So yes, they do score during these clutch situations at a higher rate than the rest of the game.

Manu is at his best in a tight game when he will do things like take a charge and ignite a 12-2 run in the 4th quarter to blow a game open.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Nikos said:


> Manu was very consistent this season and even MORE consistent in the playoffs. Not sure where that myth came from. He has been very good all season and even better in the playoffs.
> 
> Manu is also a very good player in his own right, not purely because of Duncan. You don't get 21-6-4 on very efficient shooting in the playoffs just by playing with Duncan. Manu was the only Spur along with Horry to improve his stats in the playoffs. Duncan himself wasn't even his normal self, and the rest of the Spurs statistical outputs declined. So I would say Manu stepped up in his own right and was an excellent second banana to Duncan.
> 
> That being said, Vince Carter is the better standalone talent than Manu. Manu steps up in his second star role but that doesn't mean he is neccesarily BETTER. He is a better teamatte, better proffesional maybe if what is said about Vince quitting on his team is true. Manu probably UPS his game in the playoffs moreso than Vince, but Vince might be able to do the same if he were second fiddle to Tim. Each player plays different roles for their respective teams, and that makes it difficult for a fair comparison. But Vince IS the better talent.


very good post


----------



## Serg LeMagnifique (Aug 23, 2005)

Talenwise, vince is a little bit better. But if i was starting a team i would take manu. THis guy is fearless. He does a great job attacking the basket, is a good shooter, and doesn't look scared at the end of games when he steps his game to a higher gear. I would also take him over vince because we atleast know that he has always played hard every night for his team to win, unlike vince with his previos team.


----------



## The One (Jul 10, 2005)

Vince Carter

Ginobili->:cannibal:<-Carter


----------



## quick (Feb 13, 2004)

Manu Ginobili




... NOT!!!



VC>Ginobili will ever be


----------



## DaBigTicketKG21 (Apr 27, 2003)

Id take the 2002-2003 Vince carter over Manu Ginobili. Manu doesnt do **** in the regular season and he is inconsistent. Manu is a pretty good playoff player though/


----------



## ViNNNsanity (Jul 25, 2005)

about VC being a terrible defender...

04-05
Raps vs Heat. last 10 or so seconds of the game, heat down by 2. VC was guarding wade, wade tries to take it in, cant, vc in his face, wade - steps back fadeaway jumper, vc challenges, vc bout to swat it, wade wild mid-air pass to jones, time running out, jones launches a 3, blocked by VC.

TO beats Miami...if any1 got the vid, post it up n shut these haters up.

03-04
atlanta game = pure vintage vc
vs bulls - blocks antonio davis dunk 1sec left, to force OT
vs la(clips) - TO with lead, LA fast break, vc takes charge 25.8 sec left in the fourth. TO gains possession, wins


----------



## MitchMatch (Jul 20, 2004)

I take VC.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

ViNNNsanity said:


> about VC being a terrible defender...
> 
> 04-05
> Raps vs Heat. last 10 or so seconds of the game, heat down by 2. VC was guarding wade, wade tries to take it in, cant, vc in his face, wade - steps back fadeaway jumper, vc challenges, vc bout to swat it, wade wild mid-air pass to jones, time running out, jones launches a 3, blocked by VC.
> ...



So you found 4 instances of good defense in his career.

Congrats. That must mean he is a great defender.


----------



## joshed_up (Aug 6, 2005)

Vintage said:


> So you found 4 instances of good defense in his career.
> 
> Congrats. That must mean he is a great defender.


real nice, attackin the poster for citing soem good instances on defence?
do you expect him/her to find everything and post it? lol.


----------



## Diophantos (Nov 4, 2004)

joshed_up said:


> real nice, attackin the poster for citing soem good instances on defence?
> do you expect him/her to find everything and post it? lol.


He's just saying that 4 isolated examples of good defense doesn't make someone a good defender. I'm sure I could find similar instances for half the players in the league. It'd be better to describe generally why your man is a good defender, rather than plucking random examples.


----------



## ViNNNsanity (Jul 25, 2005)

those are defense in clutch situations jus not too long ago. sorrie i havent been postin since this thread started, but i thought vc could use a lil defense over here. so yea, ive been reading this i heard someone stating..

show me instances where vc was clutch, excluding 2000-01, that he is a 'terrible defender'

so there ya go


----------



## joshed_up (Aug 6, 2005)

Diophantos said:


> He's just saying that 4 isolated examples of good defense doesn't make someone a good defender. I'm sure I could find similar instances for half the players in the league. It'd be better to describe generally why your man is a good defender, rather than plucking random examples.


lol. i know, but the way it was put, it was like, totally questioning the intelligence of the previous poster, the way he put it. now, no offence either, but it was IMO. the tone.

its hard to define how good a defender(guards) is, unless u are like Ron artest or Bruce Bowen, shutting down players for the game, but this leads to a poor offensive output. (makes u kinda tired). its easier for big men, to define a good defender. maybe its easy to state the nice defensive moments, but the hardwork on defence are usually not displayed on the stats. i think? hmm. doing things that dont show up on stats, like, pressuring your man, and marking him out. isnt that good D?

i would love to hear your view on this. :cheers:


----------



## Ryoga (Aug 31, 2002)

magic_bryant said:


> I take Ginobili's heart. I prefer heart and desire over any and EVERYTHING.
> [snip]


wonderful post.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> First of all, **** you! What do you know about basketball besides worshipping Penny and Carter?
> 
> I'll save detailed analysis so I don't make you look like a fool.


so I admit I was worshiping but not to some extent like you with Manu, the guy sux! F the entire Spurs O!


----------



## Kobe8Bryant11 (Jun 30, 2005)

Haha wow, this is one really easy thread question. How could you even compare these two players in your right mind? One is so much better than the other is aint even funny. Have you ever seen Vince Carter play or do you just watch the highlights of him on ESPN? The guy is insane, hence the name 'Vincanity'. Manu might be better than him one day, but that day isnt today, or tomorrow, or the next day, sorry bro. Try this thread again in about 3 years, then maybe we can consider your boy, but for now, Carter hands down, its just common sense.


----------

