# Parker/Ginobili



## ballstorm (Nov 30, 2003)

"If you think Tony Parker is better than Manu Ginobili, you need to stop drinking before you come in here." -- Barkley, to Kenny.


Reading Barkley is (almost) always the promise of a good laugh. Do you think like him that kenny should stop drinking? Or , in more conventional way , do you agree with is statement that Gino is better than Tony?


----------



## Dartherus (Jan 10, 2004)

I think manu is waaay better than Parker, not only about defense...
Think about this, Parker is a PG, and Manu has much better court vision than Tony. Parker is a ballhog SG playing the point, he inflates his assists numbers by the easy pass to Duncan and Duncan scoring, but it's very rare (I didn't see it myself) to see Parker making a huge play denoting high Basketball IQ, he can score his own way, he's very good at it, but is overall Basketball IQ is far from beeing impresive, IMO. 

I guess Pop could do it better making Manu play the point in offense and Parker play the SG, so manu would take wiser decisions, when is convenient for TD to shoot, when Parker must shoot, or even when it's better for him to shoot. In Deffense, Manu (would guard the oposing SG) and Parker (guarding the oposing PG) would switch sides to avoid size mismatch.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

This is a question that I have always wondered about, and here is my solution to it:

Ginobili *IS* the better player, but him and Parker have the same effect on the court for the Spurs. Basically, Ginobili is better than Parker, but both are just as important to the Spurs.

I'll give Parker two years, and I think he will definitely be better than Manu. The reason for that is that it seems as if Manu has now set himself as a NBA player, meaning he has found his niche in the league. I don't think Parker has yet found his niche, even though he was the starting PG for a championship team. Once Parker "discovers" what kind of PG he is (A pass first PG, or a shoot first PG), Parker will be better than Manu.


----------



## XxMia_9xX (Oct 5, 2002)

Parker is better than manu... just the fact that manu has played in Argentina and Italy and was 2 time MVP it gave him so much experience already. For Parker he only like played a year in France and automatically playing in the NBA when he was 19. Manu is a different player than him though. i like both of them, as of now i think they're equally good. ohh well as long as they are both a spur i dont care who's better...


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

i think Manu is better...just a better overall player


----------



## ballstorm (Nov 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KokotheMonkey</b>!
> Ginobili IS the better player, but him and Parker have the same effect on the court for the Spurs. Basically, Ginobili is better than Parker, but both are just as important to the Spurs.
> 
> I'll give Parker two years, and I think he will definitely be better than Manu. The reason for that is that it seems as if Manu has now set himself as a NBA player, meaning he has found his niche in the league. I don't think Parker has yet found his niche, even though he was the starting PG for a championship team. Once Parker "discovers" what kind of PG he is (A pass first PG, or a shoot first PG), Parker will be better than Manu.


this temperate view sounds ok to me. At the present time , Ginobili is better but things are not unmoving . May be in a few years Parker will be better. I particulary agree with the fact that Parker as not yet found a "niche" in the league. At this point , he does not know exactly the direction he is supposed to give to his game.



> Originally posted by <b>Dartherus</b>!
> 
> Parker is a ballhog SG playing the point, he inflates his assists numbers by the easy pass to Duncan


Parker shoots sometimes too much but .432 fg% is not bad . Just average.
gino's .401 fg% is not better..

besides , i do think that it is not fair to reproach to parker to "inflate" his assists number by passing to duncan . He has to give the ball first to duncan. this is not necessarily his choice : duncan is arguably the best player in the league. it's normal that he get plenty of plays for him.
he might not be as inventive as ginobili , neither so spectacular , but he is ambitius and tenacious. He has plenty of work to accomplish , but he remains among the best 21 years old PG in the league. (who else?)


----------



## Dartherus (Jan 10, 2004)

Parker is young, ok. However, PG with great court vision showed that potential in very early times. Seeing the current Parker, I'd guess he could become a very good scoring guard, perhaps he'll improve his consistency in scoring, he won't waste big leads in the future, but I don't think he'll ever have the court vision, basketball IQ (for offense and defense) of Manu, those are things that players are born with, they can be improved, but not so much as other physical skills or discipline issues can, only with will to improve, any basketball coach can confirm you that.

About Parker assists, when I said, inflated, I didn't mean that it's incorrect to pass to TD, I mean that Parker is uncapable of plays where he can show to have court vision and high basketball IQ, his assist are mainly from pass to TD, where Tim mades his way to the basket, as the PG, he has all the primary passes to TD, that raises his assist numbers. OTOH, look at manu assists, he doesn't carry the ball, but when he receives the ball, his assists are awesome, he finds the open men in heavy traffic, he can control the tempo, I mean, that when the ball is in manu's hand, you know it's in good hands, that can't be said on Parker, and even when he gets older, it's not sure that he'll improve in this issue, as explained before.

Manu has low FG (lower FG than Parker, but still better 3pt% and ft%) because he's the third shooting option, he usually get very difficult shoots with few seconds left, after Duncan and Parker couldn't score in the main Pop Schemas. Pop rigid schemas hurt badly manu offensive stats, manu is mainly a running man, very creative and unpredictable, that doesn't match the Spurs rigid and static offensive way. That's why it's a bigger merit Manu's current production, perhaps he's 3rd in scoring, but now is clearly 2nd (after Tim) in Stats Efficiency ranking, that despite the value intangibles he contributes to the team. Pop knows that, that's why he thinks manu is so valuable for the team.


----------



## g_prince_4_lyfe (Sep 10, 2003)

Manu is better than Parker! I mean, who would've guessed that this guy would be so valuable to the team in his rookie season! He was a key to the Spurs championship and is still a key to the Spurs success this season! He can dunk the ball too! Now THAT"S amazing! 

But who cares who's better? Their both on the same team! They both have a championship! They bboth have Tim Duncan on their team! It's all good!


----------



## LegoHat (Jan 14, 2004)

Manu is best, not even close! Manu is a better overall player with better court vision and he is a good jumpshot away from being a superstar, Parker isn´t even close...


----------



## Zalgirinis (Feb 18, 2003)

Ginobili all the way. I havent seen much of Spurs games in NBA, just a few, but I saw Ginobili playing in Europe and he was awesome here and I also saw Tony Parker in Europe Championship in 2003, where he was ballhoging all the time.

Ginobili's defense is outstanding, he works for two in there, but his offense is also good. Now he seems to be in shooting slump, but that might be connected with his injury and losing his starting job. Parker who should be a true PG on a team which has Tim Duncan seems to think about his own shots more than his assists. Thats not the way PG should play, well yea maybe he will discover that with his age, but I doubt that.


----------



## j07950 (Apr 19, 2004)

You guys do need to understand one thing, Parker is about 5 years younger than Ginobili. Ginobili may only be in his 2nd year but he's considered a Vet age wise... So if you think Ginobili is better than Parker we've actually got 5 years to wait and see...Than we'll bring out the tapes of Ginobili (now) and compare with parker (5 years down the road), as they'll have the same age, and see who's the best... You guys often forget how young Tony Parker is. Also, look at Steve Nash or Sam Cassel, they weren't great passers when they entered the league, now a few years later they are both in the top 5 in assists, so the whole "you can't improve court vision and passing skills" is whole lot of bull****....

I rest my case...


----------



## Luiz_Rodrigo (Dec 2, 2003)

Both are great players and I´m happy that they´re in the Spurs´roster.

Parker increased a lot recently, he showed his court vision and passing hability against the Grizzlies.

In two or 3 years he´ll be an all star.


----------



## Admiral (Apr 14, 2004)

I prefer Parker. He was barely 19 when he played his first NBA game and captured his first ring at the age of 20, outplaying several All-Star point guards during that stretch. While that age is nothing earth-shaking anymore with all the high school kids making the NBA right after the draft, it is absolutely huge for an European player. When was the last time a late, European first round draft pick started in nearly of his team's games the season right afterwards? His biggest problem is the ability to mix his scoring game with his playmaking game, resulting in problem numero duo; consistency. Both are still luxery problems in this stage of his career, I mean he just turned twenty-freaking-one, the age you're officially an adult. I figure that with more seasoning (say in 4 years at the age of 25), we'll see Tony Parker at full potential and that is perfectly natural, while in fact it's already extremely rare what he has shown us so far. And a Tony Parker at full potential is a pretty scary thought, I am thinking between 18/20 points a night, between 3/5 rebounds and about 6/7 assist, maybe even a steal or more per game as well, but it all depends. I honestly don't see him averaging 20 points a night in the current Pop formula, nor as long Duncan plays by his side, but he _easily_ has the skills, the composure, the patience and the overall upside to do so for multiple seasons. This is why I find this matchup rather unfair, as Manu Ginobili is about 5 years older, FIVE years! A major difference. Sure Parker has one more NBA season under his belt, but Gino was able to develop his game with no further pressure whatsoever for 5 straight seasons and pretty much came into the NBA at full potential. Ginobili won't develop much further, maybe he'll continue to make silent improvements for the next 2 years, but they won't be considerable. Whereas Tony is about at 60%.

But even now, I still find Parker to be his equal, at least. They both play between 25 and 35 minutes a night, they both average between 10 and 15 points while neither will be mistaken for a Pedrag Stojakovic or a Ray Allen. Ginobili has a rebounding edge of about 1.5, which is logical considering the height advantage. He does seem to be a slightly better defensive player, but Parker ain't no scrub at all either, just credit Manu for being such a well-rounded guard. Hell, he can play PG, SG or even SF. I expect both to improve over the years, but I expect Parker to do it with much bigger strides. But come back when Parker is about Gino's age and I seriously think no one would vote for Manu anymore.

On a different note, if Ginobili wasn't nearly as flashy or as exciting as he was today, I doubt people would care about him as much, he's a fan favorite and I honestly think it has overrated him a tad.

Sincerely, a die-hard Spurs fan..


----------



## JGKoblenz (Jul 19, 2002)

If you want to see a thread about this before the season started, here is the [link]


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Parker has more potential. He is younger, still has as much impact as Ginobili and can score just as good. He doesnt have the court vision of Manu or the Defense but he still is gonna be better down the road in two to three years. I vote TP.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>texan</b>!
> Parker has more potential. He is younger, still has as much impact as Ginobili and can score just as good. He doesnt have the court vision of Manu or the Defense but he still is gonna be better down the road in two to three years. I vote TP.



Yeah, it's pretty much by default that Parker should have more potential because of the simple fact that he is a good 5-6 years younger than Manu. Manu is an awesome player now, (Awesome talent) but Parker is capable of being a top-tier PG, and top-tier meaning one of the top 5 PG's in the league. I don't think Manu can reach that level with his age. Once his athleticism starts to decline, he's going to have to give his game a face-lift. Parker has that buffer zone to where he can rely on his athleticism for the next 5-6 years, as Manu doesn't. 



By the way, I can't wait to see Tony Parker in 3 years (Hopefully he'll be on the Spurs). I truthfully think he is capable of being a top-notch PG in this league. He has the confidence, he has the big-game experience and big game sucess, and he just needs to improve his game over the years. If we keep him long-term, he's going to be very critical to our sucess (Or lack of it).


----------



## Luiz_Rodrigo (Dec 2, 2003)

In my opinion, Parker is better than Manu right now!

He has everything to be a top pg in the league, and one of the 5 greatest european players of all time. He has the skills, nice and fast hands, quickness and has a good shoot.
His unique problem is his inconsistency, but he´s becoming more regular (specially since the 11 last games of this regular season) and is showing his great talent.
He´ll become scary in the future... maybe a kind of Marbury, playong with the greatest power forward of all time!


----------



## Fangio (Nov 7, 2003)

I'm argie, my fault, but I really don't like Parker, I hate his personality, I don't like he always choose to shot instead of assist, and I don't think he would become a Jason Kidd in 10, nor 20 years. 
I'm not saying his bad, far from that, he is a skilled player, but his desicions in the court in the majority of cases are really bad, and save by his capacity for score. But bad desicions are a major fault for a PG, plus only in the esthetic aspect: he lacks of show, that floating ball is so ugly and he made a Jason Kidd spectacullar pass...never, or really few times. 
As for gino, I love the guy, but when he is not the first choice to score (and how could he be with the awesome Duncan), and even most of the time he is not the second option, his game fall into inconsistancy many times, plus he is not a three point shooter, but he takes the task because the team demands that, and he has the BALLS to do it, specially when everything is against and he is nearer to failure than to success, didn't you notice that Popovich's choices are him (a sub) or Duncan? where is the "speciallist" Bowen or the marvellous Parker when things are on going down the drain? do you really think this would change in 7, 20 years? if he hasn't have the balls right now...never, that is what Barkley loves of Manu, more than his skills, athletism, or capacity for every role: HIS BALLS and DETERMINATION, a PG MUST have that, he is the one that haves to carry the team, not the big guys like Duncan (no matter his enourmous talent).
Manu never was, nor in Argentina, nor in Europe, a even a second option and is hard to him to adapt to this, he knows he have less fewer chances, and that's a lot of pressure. 
Of course manu is mad, with strange descicions and wrong moves...always, but he is more regular in scoring when a team plays for him, he can easily have a 20 ppg. 
Finally if we are guessing about the future, why not going backwards, what could happen if Gino arrives to NBA 5 or 4 years ago and as at least second option in a team?, may be he would be a blast by now. But the most important factor is that Manu is one of the most intelligent and winner players, he knows he plays with Duncan and in a really serious team, so he choose to win a tittle more than being for years in the NBA without any real glory.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

100% sure, Ginobili is better than Parker.

Spurs backcourt is better than Lakers'.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Fangio</b>!
> I'm argie, my fault, but I really don't like Parker, I hate his personality, I don't like he always choose to shot instead of assist, and I don't think he would become a Jason Kidd in 10, nor 20 years.
> I'm not saying his bad, far from that, he is a skilled player, but his desicions in the court in the majority of cases are really bad, and save by his capacity for score. But bad desicions are a major fault for a PG, plus only in the esthetic aspect: he lacks of show, that floating ball is so ugly and he made a Jason Kidd spectacullar pass...never, or really few times.
> As for gino, I love the guy, but when he is not the first choice to score (and how could he be with the awesome Duncan), and even most of the time he is not the second option, his game fall into inconsistancy many times, plus he is not a three point shooter, but he takes the task because the team demands that, and he has the BALLS to do it, specially when everything is against and he is nearer to failure than to success, didn't you notice that Popovich's choices are him (a sub) or Duncan? where is the "speciallist" Bowen or the marvellous Parker when things are on going down the drain? do you really think this would change in 7, 20 years? if he hasn't have the balls right now...never, that is what Barkley loves of Manu, more than his skills, athletism, or capacity for every role: HIS BALLS and DETERMINATION, a PG MUST have that, he is the one that haves to carry the team, not the big guys like Duncan (no matter his enourmous talent).
> ...




Damn, you're pretty harsh on Parker. Let's not forget the guys is 21 years old, because everything that you said negative about Parker (Most of it I agree with actually) can be fixed with experience. It's like I said earlier in this thread: Parker hasn't developed an identity yet. Now, you're comparing Parker's passing ability to Kidds' passing ability? You might as well compare Ginobili's fadeaway with Jordan's while you're at it. There haven't been many Jason Kidds in the NBA, and there probably won't be many more. Passing ability like that is a once-in-a-generation thing, so it's no dissapointment that Parker can't pass like Kidd.


Now, as far as Manu having "BALLS", I agree with the message you are sending. Maybe a more accurate way to say it is that he is fearless when taking it to the basket. That's one of his best qualities, but that's also one of his downfalls. You also mentioned that Ginobili isn't a 3-point shooter? Well, he makes enough to be considered a good three point shooter, while shooting a good percentage as well.


----------



## XxMia_9xX (Oct 5, 2002)

well i disagree.. parker is awesome. i think the majority thinks manu is better just because he's the spark of the team off the bench and has highlights even if he shoots so crappy.... manu turns the ball over soo much, he's soo crazy w/ the ball, but i still love him. 

parker doesn't get much assist because he's a scoring pg. he's the second scoring option on the team. he's told to do it, if he's not, do u guys really think Popavich would let him shoot so much?... i noticed that he improved on the passing this year... ever since he started playing bball parker has been the scorer. its kinda hard to switch from a scorer to a passer right away. plus he never really played professional bball before he entered NBA, while manu has been the league MVP's and best player for his country. parker only played not even a year in france.... entered NBA when he was 19! manu is pretty much at its peek and while parker hasn't even reach his potential, and look how great he's playing now... especially in the playoffs.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>XxMia_9xX</b>!
> manu is pretty much at its peek and while parker hasn't even reach his potential, and look how great he's playing now... especially in the playoffs.



That's the line that sums it all up. Nice.:yes:


----------



## Zalgirinis (Feb 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KokoTheMonkey</b>!
> 
> Damn, you're pretty harsh on Parker. Let's not forget the guys is 21 years old, because everything that you said negative about Parker (Most of it I agree with actually) can be fixed with experience. It's like I said earlier in this thread: Parker hasn't developed an identity yet.


Yea, Fargio was kinda harsh on Parker, but I believe he was right with most of his words. And I dont think that it will be fixed with experience, because I doubt that Parker's attitude or how to say... nature will change. He will always remain the guy, who wants to shoot it first and thats not what PG should be. He wants to be in the spotlight all the time and that comes better with scoring and not assists. Such thing is in his brains and its hardly will change with experience.


----------



## AMR (Oct 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Luiz_Rodrigo</b>!
> In my opinion, Parker is better than Manu right now!
> 
> He has everything to be a top pg in the league, and one of the 5 greatest european players of all time. He has the skills, nice and fast hands, quickness and has a good shoot.


     

He's a great NBA player, but.... 5 greatest europeans????? no way... have you realized what you're saying??? Jasikevicius owned Parker in the last Eurobasket and nobody would say that Saras is even a top 20 player in the history of European basketball...


----------



## AMR (Oct 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Luiz_Rodrigo</b>!
> In my opinion, Parker is better than Manu right now!
> 
> He has everything to be a top pg in the league, and one of the 5 greatest european players of all time. He has the skills, nice and fast hands, quickness and has a good shoot.


     

He's a great NBA player, but.... 5 greatest europeans????? no way... have you realized what you're saying??? Jasikevicius owned Parker in the last Eurobasket and nobody would say that Saras is even a top 20 player in the history of European basketball...


----------



## ballstorm (Nov 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Fangio</b>!
> I'm argie, my fault, but I really don't like Parker, I hate his personality, I don't like he always choose to shot instead of assist, and I don't think he would become a Jason Kidd in 10, nor 20 years.
> I'm not saying his bad, far from that, he is a skilled player, but his desicions in the court in the majority of cases are really bad, and save by his capacity for score. But bad desicions are a major fault for a PG, plus only in the esthetic aspect: he lacks of show, that floating ball is so ugly and he made a Jason Kidd spectacullar pass...never, or really few times.
> As for gino, I love the guy, but when he is not the first choice to score (and how could he be with the awesome Duncan), and even most of the time he is not the second option, his game fall into inconsistancy many times, plus he is not a three point shooter, but he takes the task because the team demands that, and he has the BALLS to do it, specially when everything is against and he is nearer to failure than to success, didn't you notice that Popovich's choices are him (a sub) or Duncan? where is the "speciallist" Bowen or the marvellous Parker when things are on going down the drain? do you really think this would change in 7, 20 years? if he hasn't have the balls right now...never, that is what Barkley loves of Manu, more than his skills, athletism, or capacity for every role: HIS BALLS and DETERMINATION, a PG MUST have that, he is the one that haves to carry the team, not the big guys like Duncan (no matter his enourmous talent).
> ...


Man , Argentineans are hot-blodded ... ...and sometimes biased too. 

Parker has made tremendous progresses lately . Now , he is the one who runs the point . Before , Pop was calling almost all the plays from the bench . Isn't it a clue of how he has improved? he won't never turn into a distributive point guard. You all noticed that he was firstly a scorer , and it's absolutely right. Now, I like players such as Sam Cassel , kevin Jonhson . They always look for scoring first , but it does not prevent them from being efficient . The main thing consists in finding a good balance between shoots and assists. 
Concenring Ginobili , he got that thing one can hardly learn : I don't know how to call this thing ... One can say talent , or , in this particular case , Art. Gino is the kind of player that make you feel like he is not exactly playing the same game as the others. One of the rare player that often late me agape . 
Now , the addition of the two compose a rather devastating lineup . Both of them can score or pass at will. Hard to defend! (just ask Hubie  )


----------



## Luiz_Rodrigo (Dec 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>AMR</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If Jasikevicius played for the Spurs, I would say the same about him that I said about Parker   

By the way, Parker is much younger than Jasikevicius. When he was 21, I doubt that he was playing as well as Parker.


----------



## Fangio (Nov 7, 2003)

Yes I was too harsh, you are damn right, I'm still angry with specially the first season of Manu with his hands up asking the ball and the PG...nothing, instead of giving the ball so that Manu can recover from his injures, no that ugly floating ball...but as you said he improve his game is not the same Parker, but that spark, intelligence and balls Manu has...never, I don't see it but I also don't have the skills of Nostradamus, so I can be wrong. 
About the art issue in Manu, is what makes me love the guy, and you are right Luiz that Kidd is one of a kind, but I expect the PG with flashy moves it cames with the role, or at least your game is simply and you assist a lot, but Parker is in the middle of ...nowhere.
Manu is inconsistant, no doubt about it, but it has to do a lot of what is his role in the team, anyone that follows Manu's carreer in Europe and in NT knows what I'm talking about, he can carrie a team and be far more consistant if he is allow to miss, in this squeme his allowed to miss when Pop give him the balls nobody wants. 
Luiz you are right he is not a bad three point shooter, but he is improving in that aspect just now, and that is an example that he never stops to learn or sacrifice his game in the name of the team.
Bye the way Hi! I'm new and I even say hi, that's at least rude to make an opinion on a player that was too harsh for a first post, my apologyse.



> Man , Argentineans are hot-blodded ... ...and sometimes biased too.


Totally agree  , but it is in our nature, at least in sports, the real and important issues as a Nation (nation what is that?)...no way, always going down the drain. 
Is the 110% almost every argentinian gives in any discipline what makes them stand in front of the USA team and say, ok lets take them, 120% they are going to be trash, but let's take them, no pain no glory, and we are very individuall people that arranges themselves in extreme situations, take Manu for instance, not the type of game he used to play, injured, foreigner, mad moves, and he stills being himself and stand up.
Few times we make teams (the basketball NT is one) and mostly we are blessed with ones of the most talented players in many disciplines of all times, but is there a school left? NO, just in football, and because players grow as lilies, so I love what is happening in basquet, new players, great team solidarity, I hope they make school, after all in 1950 we were the world champs, and then.... decades of nothing.


----------



## Luiz_Rodrigo (Dec 2, 2003)

I´ll change the subject a little...

What a amazing basketball team Argentina has! Manu, Scola, Delfino, Nocioni... they all are wonderful players!

Being brazilian it´s hard to me admit that Argentina´s team is better, but that´s the reality, they´re great, which is wonderful to the latin american basketball.

Manu is an awesome player and is very versatile, but to me the Spurs need more from Parker than from Ginobili.


----------



## ballstorm (Nov 30, 2003)

> > Man , Argentineans are hot-blodded ... ...and sometimes biased too.
> 
> 
> Totally agree , but it is in our nature, at least in sports


We all are more or less biased when it comes to sports . Being argentinean , you have to support Gino , and me , being French , I have to support Parker..  



> Bye the way Hi! I'm new


Welcome Fangio , beware of not exceeding the speed limit 



> What a amazing basketball team Argentina has! Manu, Scola, Delfino, Nocioni... they all are wonderful players!


You are right , Luiz-Rodrigo , what a great team Argentina is! I hope that Nocioni will receive a good proposition from the NBA next year and will be given enough playing time to prove how good he is.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Tony Parker sure made a case for himself as the better player out of the two against Memphis.


----------



## XxMia_9xX (Oct 5, 2002)

true! parker was awesome! i think it was more because of the match up, why manu didn't do so well in the 1st round... i expect a better series from manu against the lakers.... actually i expect a really good series by both manu and parker, their qiuckness will kill the lakers, plus manu and parker always play well against the lakers. no answer for duncan either.


----------



## Future_All-star (May 3, 2004)

Though everyone is allowed their own opinion let me tell you about one thing that has happened that should surely sway you towards TP he made Gary Payton look like a fool. And he left Kobe glued to the floor watching him go by. He hit an Acrobatic three to end the first quarter and still made it all look easy. and whoever it was hating on him saying that he boosts his assists by giving it to TD that may be true but most of the time he sets his teamates up by driving the lane and then passing it out to the open man.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Both are good players but I don't really think you can compare them. TP is the leader of our team and good at running the offense. He should be our number 2 option on offense and has a really nice shot. Manu, on the other hand, provides us energy like no other player(outside of Bobby Jackson) can. He is an amazing defensive player and also provides us with an offensive spark. He could score 25 a night if given the minutes and the touches. He is an all around player for us though and does all the little things that make us just that much better. Both arre really important to our teams success and if I had to decide, I couldn't.


----------



## Fangio (Nov 7, 2003)

Well, Did you saw Parker and Manu REALLY TALKING and PLAYING together, that is the way to go to PArker, the two on fire are a blast, I still by the way how can the turk is first instead of Manu???, I know I say to myself is a tactic to have a real first team player fresh and ready, a luxury no other team has...but Manu benching or having few minutes:sigh:


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

dont fret. we take manu off the bench cuz we need that spark. it doesnt matter who starts ne ways. it matters who finishes and manu finishes the majority of games. he also gets 30 minutes or so.


----------



## davis (May 9, 2004)

As long as he stays on the team next year. Any other team he would start, so he might leave to go to a team that would let him start. 

Manu have trouble keeping the ball, he gets to the ball fast but Parker can run faster with it. Manu needs to learn how to keep the ball and not get a turnover, while Parker needs to bank more of his shots.


----------



## davis (May 9, 2004)

I know that Payton use to be faster than he is now, but was he ever as fast as Parker. I know that he's bigger and stronger so he can do a post up and stuff but were people ever amazed at his speed like they're with Parker's now.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

BUMP.




It's interesting to read what everyone thought over the course of last season. I said Manu was the better player last season, and he's probably still the better player this season. That's talent-wise though. 



Parker has been taking over games this season, and his consistency is really coming around. Manu is having a great season as well, and I'd still say that Manu is the better player. Come this time next year, I expect Parker to be the better player.


Have any of your thoughts changed? Most of us said Manu was the better player, and this year neither one has really separated from the other. Manu did make the All-Star team, but Parker is neck-and-neck with him in terms of value and talent.


----------



## ballstorm (Nov 30, 2003)

Well , I don't know if Manu is a better player now than he was last year ... On the other hand , there is no doubt that parker has improved . Consistency was quite a big flaw in his game but it's no longer the case. Gino is still the best player but the space has shortened . Next year? who knows


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Honestly, I am still deadlocked in my decision in terms of talent and value to this team. Both of them step up when we need them most, and both of them have their bad games as well. Manu has been more consistent this year, but both have improved greatly in that category. They both score when needed, and both get the team involved. Parker has stepped up his D as well. I think they are equally as valuable to this team.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Manu's consistency right now is really helping his case against Parker, but I think Parker has shown some great promise by dominating on offense. Manu can do this as well, but he doesn't do it as frequently as Parker does. 



And yes, Parker's defense has been much better. He doesn't get much mention on defense, but he's a big part of the great overall defense as well.


----------



## rocketsthathavespurs (Jul 17, 2004)

parker will be the better player in 3 yr he will be the best point in the nba but for now manu


----------

