Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili.

Moderators: jamaalstar21, -Sammy-, infinite11285, ken6199, Domejandro, bwgood77, Dirk, zimpy27, KingDavid

Do They get into the hall of Fame if they didn't spend their whole careers on a contender?

Yes
63
50%
No
33
26%
50/50
29
23%
 
Total votes: 125

batmana
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,750
And1: 1,315
Joined: Feb 18, 2009
 

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#61 » by batmana » Wed Sep 15, 2021 10:11 am

Manu definitely for his FIBA play. Not to mention that even on a team like the Kings, he would still be good, just wouldn't be winning playoff games. He could definitely play a larger role and average 20-21 PPG for a number of seasons. 24 PPG is a stretch not that in he couldn't do it but that he would probably break down quickly playing huge minutes.

Tony Parker also has FIBA success but I don't know whether the European Championship along with being MVP is enough (I don't follow FIBA closely and I don't know if there are relevant comparisons). However, an above poster mentioned Navarro and since I was watching a bit more FIBA games some 5-10 years ago, I think Navarro is definitely making the Hall of Fame. He returned to Barcelona because he was like Jordan in Europe (an exaggeration but still); didn't he receive a lifetime contract around that time? The alternative would have been trying to crack NBA rotations as a 7th man off the bench in an era where small tweener scoring guards were less effective than today for instance. He simply chose to go back and be a star than be just one of the guys in the NBA (just like Rudy Fernandez would do later).

And imagining Tony Parker in the East... He would be an all-star just by numbers alone, there were years where the East all-star team featured some players who wouldn't even be considered in the West. Meanwhile Tony was competing and making all-star appearances against a deep crop of veteran and young stars out west.
88.0 FGA Team
C - Gilmore (81-82)/McHale
PF - Rodman (91-92)/McHale (87-88)
SF - Worthy (85-86)/Rodman/Ariza
SG - Miller (93-94)/Ariza (08-09)/Dragic
PG - Johnson (88-89)/Dragic (09-10)
Jables
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,940
And1: 1,475
Joined: Jul 21, 2014
   

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#62 » by Jables » Wed Sep 15, 2021 10:29 am

Man I remember when Deron Williams was getting hyped Tony Parker wasn't even in the discussion for best Point Guard in the NBA, whereas most people think Manu was held back by the system (and I'm assuming his body would adapt to 34 min games) Parker really wasn't, he didn't have to be a playmaker in the system and could just do what he was best at.

Yes I think Parkers reputation was really built by the Spurs, not a great passer, not a great defender, not a 3 point shooter, what is this dude as a number 1 scorer playing for some East team getting a bunch of All Star games (supposedly)? Is anyone calling Kemba Walker a top 20 PG ever? No, it's because of the Spurs. Very crafty player, I liked watching him, not a hall of famer by himself.
AMW27
Pro Prospect
Posts: 866
And1: 225
Joined: Jun 03, 2013

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#63 » by AMW27 » Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:02 pm

Jables wrote:Man I remember when Deron Williams was getting hyped Tony Parker wasn't even in the discussion for best Point Guard in the NBA, whereas most people think Manu was held back by the system (and I'm assuming his body would adapt to 34 min games) Parker really wasn't, he didn't have to be a playmaker in the system and could just do what he was best at.

Yes I think Parkers reputation was really built by the Spurs, not a great passer, not a great defender, not a 3 point shooter, what is this dude as a number 1 scorer playing for some East team getting a bunch of All Star games (supposedly)? Is anyone calling Kemba Walker a top 20 PG ever? No, it's because of the Spurs. Very crafty player, I liked watching him, not a hall of famer by himself.
I agree you can make a case both of those guys at their peaks were better than Parker at his.
User avatar
mixerball
Veteran
Posts: 2,515
And1: 2,073
Joined: May 08, 2010

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#64 » by mixerball » Wed Sep 15, 2021 10:18 pm

when i saw the title i immediately knew there was gonna be some silly take.

manu is one of the the all time greats.

manu and parker made spurs contenders. they didint to just happen to play on one.

UcanUwill wrote:
ellobo wrote:Didn't they kind of have something to do with making their teams contenders (and champions)?


Of course, but they arent LeBron like talents where they could make any team contender just by themselves. There is hypothetical reality where those guys are on crap teams.

there is a reason manu never played for a crap team. also, every team manu played on was a contender. just a coincidence i guess.
User avatar
Optms
RealGM
Posts: 18,594
And1: 12,950
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
 

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginoboli. 

Post#65 » by Optms » Wed Sep 15, 2021 10:29 pm

Slim Charlez wrote:
Optms wrote:
DaddyCool19 wrote:
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.


Yes and he did this for one season, while playing for a great team. He could not sustain it because he was way too fragile and injury prone. He could barely play 65 games as a sixth man. That's all you need to know.
Slim Charlez
Starter
Posts: 2,345
And1: 2,488
Joined: Jan 15, 2017
   

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#66 » by Slim Charlez » Wed Sep 15, 2021 11:17 pm

AMW27 wrote:
Jables wrote:Man I remember when Deron Williams was getting hyped Tony Parker wasn't even in the discussion for best Point Guard in the NBA, whereas most people think Manu was held back by the system (and I'm assuming his body would adapt to 34 min games) Parker really wasn't, he didn't have to be a playmaker in the system and could just do what he was best at.

Yes I think Parkers reputation was really built by the Spurs, not a great passer, not a great defender, not a 3 point shooter, what is this dude as a number 1 scorer playing for some East team getting a bunch of All Star games (supposedly)? Is anyone calling Kemba Walker a top 20 PG ever? No, it's because of the Spurs. Very crafty player, I liked watching him, not a hall of famer by himself.
I agree you can make a case both of those guys at their peaks were better than Parker at his.


When were Deron Williams or Kemba ever MVP candidates? Deron WIilliams has a case but Kemba???? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

KEMBA?????!!!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Slim Charlez
Starter
Posts: 2,345
And1: 2,488
Joined: Jan 15, 2017
   

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginoboli. 

Post#67 » by Slim Charlez » Wed Sep 15, 2021 11:19 pm

Optms wrote:
Slim Charlez wrote:
Optms wrote:
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.


Yes and he did this for one season, while playing for a great team. He could not sustain it because he was way too fragile and injury prone. He could barely play 65 games as a sixth man. That's all you need to know.


The fact that he played next to other two HOF players means his touches were limited, if he were in some crap team like the OP stated he'd easily average 25 a game. He'd probably retire by 35 but he could do it easily in his younger days.
User avatar
HomoSapien
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 31,064
And1: 21,564
Joined: Aug 17, 2009
 

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#68 » by HomoSapien » Thu Sep 16, 2021 1:03 am

I feel good about Manu making it. Not so sure about Parker. I think he benefitted the most from Pop of the Spurs players, and I could see his career fizzling out if he started his career with a mediocre-bad coach.
ThreeYearPlan wrote:Bulls fans defend HomoSapien more than Rose.
picc
RealGM
Posts: 13,398
And1: 11,552
Joined: Apr 08, 2009
 

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#69 » by picc » Thu Sep 16, 2021 1:15 am

Kindly explain how Parker is a system player, but Manu (and Duncan, for that matter) are not? Despite them all playing for the same coach and in the same systems their whole careers, and Parker if anything being the engine of it for a number of years?
Slim Charlez
Starter
Posts: 2,345
And1: 2,488
Joined: Jan 15, 2017
   

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#70 » by Slim Charlez » Thu Sep 16, 2021 2:56 am

HomoSapien wrote:I feel good about Manu making it. Not so sure about Parker. I think he benefitted the most from Pop of the Spurs players, and I could see his career fizzling out if he started his career with a mediocre-bad coach.


The guy had atg speed and was one of the best inside finishers for his size, how the **** is that because of pop's so called system? Did he make him faster? Did he make him a lethal finisher? Some absolute nonsense on here for real
User avatar
HomoSapien
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 31,064
And1: 21,564
Joined: Aug 17, 2009
 

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#71 » by HomoSapien » Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:13 am

Slim Charlez wrote:
HomoSapien wrote:I feel good about Manu making it. Not so sure about Parker. I think he benefitted the most from Pop of the Spurs players, and I could see his career fizzling out if he started his career with a mediocre-bad coach.


The guy had atg speed and was one of the best inside finishers for his size, how the **** is that because of pop's so called system? Did he make him faster? Did he make him a lethal finisher? Some absolute nonsense on here for real


Who said anything about the system?
ThreeYearPlan wrote:Bulls fans defend HomoSapien more than Rose.
maradro
Junior
Posts: 399
And1: 158
Joined: Nov 21, 2004

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#72 » by maradro » Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:21 am

picc wrote:Kindly explain how Parker is a system player, but Manu (and Duncan, for that matter) are not? Despite them all playing for the same coach and in the same systems their whole careers, and Parker if anything being the engine of it for a number of years?


i think manu was more versatile on O and a better defender, with an iconic style to boot- hes the better and more memorable player IMO

that said, parker was very very good, IMO his problem (in terms of perception) was he was still a little green in the "new" spurs early run 03-08, and really blossomed for the 12-14 teams where he was unquestionably the best player but on a very deep team. But imo for those years he was easily top 2 point guard, a much better player than his younger self.

spurs didnt have the same style throughout the years, and in several playoff runs their ability to adapt made the difference. IMO they would be stars anywhere, the question is if there is enough beyond that to make them hof worthy- projecting tony parkers' stats, he'd be a 2nd banana ring or two away from having the accolades IMO. And manu has 02 and 04, he is the type of player that could get hot for a playoff run and make some noise, he could have ended up with a dirk like ring in 2011 (manu getting injured the last game of the regular season, then missing game 1 vs the grizzlies and playing the rest of the series with a brace on his broken arm changed the landscape for 2011- could have had mavs v spurs WCF). 2008-2011 was the spurs time with manu as the best player (and probably the worst support outside the big 3 who themselves were all banged up from 03-07 deep runs), and he got injured in the 08 playoffs, missed most of 2009, came back to get the team in the playoffs in 2010, upset the mavs and fell apart vs the suns, then first seed in 2011 only to be upset in round 1. But when he was healthy it was enough for a WCF trip and 1st seed in the west- over a whole career he could have had his dirk 2011 moment, and would probably be viewed as a much better player than a sixth man who won 5..
picc
RealGM
Posts: 13,398
And1: 11,552
Joined: Apr 08, 2009
 

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#73 » by picc » Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:49 am

maradro wrote:
picc wrote:Kindly explain how Parker is a system player, but Manu (and Duncan, for that matter) are not? Despite them all playing for the same coach and in the same systems their whole careers, and Parker if anything being the engine of it for a number of years?


i think manu was more versatile on O and a better defender, with an iconic style to boot- hes the better and more memorable player IMO


I also think Manu was a better peak player. I'm asking anyone who thinks Parker is a system player to justify why he is one, but his career-long teammates are not.
maradro
Junior
Posts: 399
And1: 158
Joined: Nov 21, 2004

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#74 » by maradro » Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:59 am

i think its a perception thing where he was the little brother to manu and duncan and when he did come into his own they were still there so he didnt get full credit, I also think parker is overshadowed unfairly. he would have been a star anywhere and beyond that it really just depends on if he has a good team around him, how healthy they are etc.. he was elite attacking the paint and system has nothing to do with that. he also looked really bad his last years and recency bias from that may play a role too, whereas manu and duncan aged better.
CIN-C-STAR
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,027
And1: 8,147
Joined: Dec 17, 2017

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#75 » by CIN-C-STAR » Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:12 am

Who had a better floater in NBA history than Tony Parker?
Not sure many if any had a better spin move either.
Great, and iconic, player.
Both definitely get in the HoF either way.
"I'd rather have Kevin Love spacing out to the three point line than anything (Karl) Malone brings"
:lol: :lol: :lol:
turnmeup88
Sophomore
Posts: 165
And1: 162
Joined: Jul 12, 2016
         

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#76 » by turnmeup88 » Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:51 am

picc wrote:
maradro wrote:
picc wrote:Kindly explain how Parker is a system player, but Manu (and Duncan, for that matter) are not? Despite them all playing for the same coach and in the same systems their whole careers, and Parker if anything being the engine of it for a number of years?


i think manu was more versatile on O and a better defender, with an iconic style to boot- hes the better and more memorable player IMO


I also think Manu was a better peak player. I'm asking anyone who thinks Parker is a system player to justify why he is one, but his career-long teammates are not.



He must be a system player as quite clearly Pop and RC Bufford also coached and managed the french national team when they won the Euros....

The Spurs allowed Parker to become elite, but the same can be said about all Spurs players (Kawhi, etc.) However, thinking that these two pioneers of International Basketball would not have HoF careers based on the the low entry level for the HoF is ridiculous.
User avatar
Ron Swanson
RealGM
Posts: 16,945
And1: 13,842
Joined: May 15, 2013

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#77 » by Ron Swanson » Thu Sep 16, 2021 1:44 pm

Manu most definitely gets in but his career is probably shorter due to increased minutes and usage on a worse team. Parker? Eh, people getting overly defensive towards those saying he wouldn't make it should probably look at the list of players that haven't made the Hall despite similar peaks/primes but not the "accolades" that came with playing for a perennial 55-60 win championship contender year in and year out.

Are Mike Conley, Jrue Holiday, and Terry Porter definite Hall of Famers? Was Parker a Top-100 player ever? Outside of the no-brainer superstars, circumstances play a large role in how a lot of these guys' careers play out and how many All-Star games they make. To me there's no question that Parker probably doesn't have 6 All-Star appearances under his belt had the voters not felt compelled to reward a 2nd Spur on teams that won 63, 58, 54, 60 (pace adjusted lockout year), 58, and 62 games. Maybe he plays for another franchise and puts up better numbers, but my gut says that his career plays out a whole lot differently had he not played with Duncan during its entirety, and even by the relatively low standards of the HoF, he just misses the cut.
Slim Charlez
Starter
Posts: 2,345
And1: 2,488
Joined: Jan 15, 2017
   

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#78 » by Slim Charlez » Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:46 pm

Ron Swanson wrote:Manu most definitely gets in but his career is probably shorter due to increased minutes and usage on a worse team. Parker? Eh, people getting overly defensive towards those saying he wouldn't make it should probably look at the list of players that haven't made the Hall despite similar peaks/primes but not the "accolades" that came with playing for a perennial 55-60 win championship contender year in and year out.

Are Mike Conley, Jrue Holiday, and Terry Porter definite Hall of Famers? Was Parker a Top-100 player ever? Outside of the no-brainer superstars, circumstances play a large role in how a lot of these guys' careers play out and how many All-Star games they make. To me there's no question that Parker probably doesn't have 6 All-Star appearances under his belt had the voters not felt compelled to reward a 2nd Spur on teams that won 63, 58, 54, 60 (pace adjusted lockout year), 58, and 62 games. Maybe he plays for another franchise and puts up better numbers, but my gut says that his career plays out a whole lot differently had he not played with Duncan during its entirety, and even by the relatively low standards of the HoF, he just misses the cut.


absolutely disrespectful to compare Parker with those guys. No offense to them but they're the definition of borderline all stars while Parker was an offensive force who was deadly in the pick and roll and was one of the better finishers inside for his size, on par with Iverson and Kyrie. I always had a theory that no one watched the Spurs and this thread proves it. The guy was already the second best player on a championship team by his second year as a 21 year old, yet he'd struggle anywhere else. laughable.
Bornstellar
Analyst
Posts: 3,256
And1: 7,252
Joined: Mar 05, 2018
 

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#79 » by Bornstellar » Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:50 pm

Conley, Holiday, and Porter don't even belong in the same sentence as Tony Parker. :lol:

This thread is pointless because what players really get into the HOF spending their entire career on bottom dwellers or playing for non-contenders? A huge part of the HOF is team success, and given that a lot of NBA awards like the all-star game are predicated on team success as well, this is a weird question to even ask.
User avatar
Ron Swanson
RealGM
Posts: 16,945
And1: 13,842
Joined: May 15, 2013

Re: Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. 

Post#80 » by Ron Swanson » Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:01 pm

"Absolutely disrespectful" to compare prime Terry Porter to Tony Parker? You guys can disagree but stop it with the hyperbole. Porter would have absolutely made All-NBA and multiple more All-Star games had the league not been absolutely loaded with All-NBA/HoF caliber PG's from 1988-1993 (Stockton, Price, Magic, KJ, Isiah Thomas). Know your history.

Return to The General Board