Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili.

[AMW27]

People talk about how good Parker and Ginobili would be franchise players on their own teams if they didn't play on the Spurs.
Well if you believe they were true franchise players/all time great Calibur players, don't you think Duncan would have won more titles than what he did? The Spurs should have been considered a superteam before LeBron and Bosh going to Miami, right?

If they did get into the hall of Fame playing elsewhere I'm not sure it would have been a for sure lock.

[Rich Michmond]

Tony Parker has 2x as many all NBA appearances as Ray Allen. You would think the opposite given how they are looked at.

And he has as many all NBA nods as Paul Pierce.

[Tottery]

I voted no, but I forgot about international play. I would switch my vote to yes because of Ginobli's accomplishments overseas. Parker, not so sure about.

[FinnTheHuman]

Parker was amazing, people just forgot how easily he kept dismantling defenses in pick n roll with his elite driving ability which included amazing handles + floaters + use of body + change of speed inside + going reverse + passing + spin moves + change of direction + elite finishing around the rim etc. He'd absolutely kill it on another team, and end up in HOF by having great individual seasons, I'm absolutely sure about that.

[turnmeup88]

Manu on literally any other team would have most likely been their franchise player, he was that good.
Parker, I dont think so.

I disagree with this, there's a way to look at it. Look at games where Manu or Parker played when Duncan and the other one were our injured. Their stat lines are ridiculous as the focal point of the offense.

They in my opinion easilly could have been 6-10x all stars if they were on another team as the number 1 guy (since we also know they have proven to be on their national team the number 1 guy).

I don't think people understand how all three of the big 3 bought into the sacrifice of personal accolades and numbers to win more chips.

[Johnny Bball]

Tony Parker would score far more than his 19,500 and be over 21,000 if you put him as a first option elsewhere. And that would be automatic entry. Even if he was less of a perrenial all-star. Not sure why anyone would doubt Parker being in the HOF if playing elsewhere and on a non-contender where he just puts up numbers instead.

it's Manu that might have the tougher time getting to that level.

[Sushimon]

It too bad the future may never know, or get to witness, how Ginobili revolutionized the Eurostep in the NBA. He made it mainstream and several current players have stated that they learned the move by watching Ginobili. Just think, now it's a move that every decent player in the NBA has in their arsenal. Not too many people adopting Lebron's "crab-dribble" (I kid. ). Ginobili's moves and elusiveness have inspired much of the later generation.

So Ginobili an unquestionable "yes"!

Parker a "yes" as there are players I would consider equivalent that have also been nominated in.

Also, being able to play well with a team should count as a positive. That's why Parker is a more effective than a player like Arenas, who was an offensive juggernaut in his prime.

[dhsilv2]

People talk about how good Parker and Ginobili would be franchise players on their own teams if they didn't play on the Spurs.
Well if you believe they were true franchise players/all time great Calibur players, don't you think Duncan would have won more titles than what he did? The Spurs should have been considered a superteam before LeBron and Bosh going to Miami, right?

If they did get into the hall of Fame playing elsewhere I'm not sure it would have been a for sure lock.

No player other than Jordan has won as many titles as Duncan did without playing for one of the two premier nba teams. Winning 5 titles in San Antonio is one of if not the greatest accomplishment anyone has ever done. Throw in how insanely unlucky the spurs got effectively 3 plays swung 3 titles away from them..and no. You realize the spurs at least when Duncan left had the highest franchise win percentage among the 30 teams?

Just look at the win percentage for Manu. He won 72.1% of his regular season games over his career. In the western conference, during one of it's best era's. Compare that to say Magic who played in the west in an all time epic weak era for the west and he won 74% of his games. Nobody is about to say Manu is better than Magic, but just how close they are given the conditions I think really points out just how insanely great the spurs were under much more difficult times.

[SF_Warriors]

Timmy was so durable and dependable for the spurs, there really wasnt a stretch where they just had depend on ginobli/TP. The closest thing to that was in 2012/13 where they played a 11 game stretch and TD missed 9 of those games. Parker averaged 26.5 ppg and 8.5apg (57%FG%) in the games duncan missed that season.

Parker when he played without Duncan from 2003/04 season to 2014/15 (22 -32 yrs old) averaged 21.8ppg and 7.4apg on about 55% TS (41 games), and that includes some games where he had limited playing time (25 minutes or less) as well. I think Parker would have been a multiple time all star even without playing next to Duncan and easily a reasonable candidate for the HOF.

For those saying TP wouldnt make the HOF, look up his stats playing without Duncan. The biggest ding on parker would be that his playstyle relied on speed and he really couldnt adapt once he started declining atheltically which led to him being cooked around 33-34 yrs old. But in his prime the guy could get into the lane and finish with the best of them.

[traax]

Both of them are going in, Manu is a first ballof Hall of Famer, what kind of question is this? Manu is the only player who won the three most important titles in Basketball. Olympic Gold, NBA Chamionship and Euroleague Champion.

[Optms]

I'd say Manu would, because if he were on a different team and played 33 mpg he could've averaged 24/5/8 on 60 TS% or so. Tony...idk. Like, what happens if he's on a bad or mediocre team? I don't think his impact was that crazy

Wouldn't that lead to him breaking down like in his early thirties? I think there was a reason, that he didn't play too many minutes. Sure I also think he would have put up better numbers from his 04/05-10/11 years, which could be considered his prime (29 MPG, 17/4/4). But 24/5/8 seems a little too optimistic.

I thought he would put up Brandon Roy like numbers before Roy broke down. So 21/5/5ish.

Manu could never carry a team and play those minutes. That is why Pop had him coming off the bench in a primarily third man role most of his career. He was way too injury prone and fragile to handle that type of usage for more than a full season.

Given his own team though, I believe he would have gotten 19/5/5. Maybe 20PPG if the team was really bad. But 24/5/8 is totally unrealistic. He was never that good at creating his own offense despite what some like to believe. The Spurs system did a great job of hiding a lot of his inabilities.

[UcanUwill]

Both of them are going in, Manu is a first ballof Hall of Famer, what kind of question is this? Manu is the only player who won the three most important titles in Basketball. Olympic Gold, NBA Chamionship and Euroleague Champion.

I really believe Manu sacrificed a lot of stats for the SPurs, he would have been easily hall of famer outside the Spurs, maybe even more of the no brainer, he was original Harden and always had the game to be a go to scorer. but OP asks if Manu wasn't on championship team, so it would leave him with Olympic gold and Euroileague championship. That Olympic gold is huge, but lets be real, Euroleague accomplishments have very very little value for Hall of fame, to get into the hall you need NBA and FIBA, no one got into hall because of Euroleague, beside maybe coaches.

[Slim Charlez]

I'd say Manu would, because if he were on a different team and played 33 mpg he could've averaged 24/5/8 on 60 TS% or so. Tony...idk. Like, what happens if he's on a bad or mediocre team? I don't think his impact was that crazy

Wouldn't that lead to him breaking down like in his early thirties? I think there was a reason, that he didn't play too many minutes. Sure I also think he would have put up better numbers from his 04/05-10/11 years, which could be considered his prime (29 MPG, 17/4/4). But 24/5/8 seems a little too optimistic.

I thought he would put up Brandon Roy like numbers before Roy broke down. So 21/5/5ish.

Manu could never carry a team and play those minutes. That is why Pop had him coming off the bench in a primarily third man role most of his career. He was way too injury prone and fragile to handle that type of usage for more than a full season.

Given his own team though, I believe he would have gotten 19/5/5. Maybe 20PPG if the team was really bad. But 24/5/8 is totally unrealistic. He was never that good at creating his own offense despite what some like to believe. The Spurs system did a great job of hiding a lot of his inabilities.

What are you talking about? He was great at creating for himself and others and averaged 19/4/4 in 07/08 playing over 70 games.


Your takes on anything spurs related are consistently terrible.

[OdomFan]

I have no objection to either of them getting in. Both deserve it for their contributions to the Spurs success, and Manu especially for his international play.

[art_tatum]

Manu wouldnt be coming off the bench for most other teams. He couldve even been 1st option on some. So i believe his nba stats wouldve looked way better.
Parker wouldve been starter on nay other team too and still probably make the hall, less likely than manu, but he was 2nd best pg for lil awhile.

[ellobo]

Both of them are going in, Manu is a first ballof Hall of Famer, what kind of question is this? Manu is the only player who won the three most important titles in Basketball. Olympic Gold, NBA Chamionship and Euroleague Champion.

Bill Bradley did it first.

[DaPessimist]

Maybe to both.

Parker needed years of development to reach his peak.

Ginobili may have spent most of his career on the IR if he were forced to carry a franchise.

[dhsilv2]

I'd say Manu would, because if he were on a different team and played 33 mpg he could've averaged 24/5/8 on 60 TS% or so. Tony...idk. Like, what happens if he's on a bad or mediocre team? I don't think his impact was that crazy

Wouldn't that lead to him breaking down like in his early thirties? I think there was a reason, that he didn't play too many minutes. Sure I also think he would have put up better numbers from his 04/05-10/11 years, which could be considered his prime (29 MPG, 17/4/4). But 24/5/8 seems a little too optimistic.

I thought he would put up Brandon Roy like numbers before Roy broke down. So 21/5/5ish.

Manu could never carry a team and play those minutes. That is why Pop had him coming off the bench in a primarily third man role most of his career. He was way too injury prone and fragile to handle that type of usage for more than a full season.

Given his own team though, I believe he would have gotten 19/5/5. Maybe 20PPG if the team was really bad. But 24/5/8 is totally unrealistic. He was never that good at creating his own offense despite what some like to believe. The Spurs system did a great job of hiding a lot of his inabilities.

You think if he had his own team he'd score LESS than his best season? A season where he averaged 19.5 a game? Yes, Manu could create his own shot at an elite level. There was no freaking "spurs system". It was get the ball to Timmy and then let Parker and Manu do whatever they want with shooters and Timmy on the floor after. Hell he averaged 19.5 of more points per 36 9 times in his career (a few short seasons to the next point).

Durability is the only serious question about Manu on his own team.

[GregOden]

People talk about how good Parker and Ginobili would be franchise players on their own teams if they didn't play on the Spurs.
Well if you believe they were true franchise players/all time great Calibur players, don't you think Duncan would have won more titles than what he did? The Spurs should have been considered a superteam before LeBron and Bosh going to Miami, right?

If they did get into the hall of Fame playing elsewhere I'm not sure it would have been a for sure lock.

So what's your narrative about KD/Harden/Westbrook, who all won MVPs but couldn't win a title together?

[AMW27]

People talk about how good Parker and Ginobili would be franchise players on their own teams if they didn't play on the Spurs.
Well if you believe they were true franchise players/all time great Calibur players, don't you think Duncan would have won more titles than what he did? The Spurs should have been considered a superteam before LeBron and Bosh going to Miami, right?

If they did get into the hall of Fame playing elsewhere I'm not sure it would have been a for sure lock.

So what's your narrative about KD/Harden/Westbrook, who all won MVPs but couldn't win a title together?

All three of those guys are first ballot hall of famers. Doesn't matter that they didn't win a title together.