Tony Parker is the best Point Guard of his generation

[AirFederer]

One of the most underrated players ever.


3 rings, 1 FMVP

[Artillery]

Pretty obvious I don't believe that. But if Parker was that good, why does Duncan only have three rings with him?

Probably because he wasn't that good? I have never argued on Parker's behalf. Always considered him a pretty awful point guard during Duncan's prime years. He's only recently started to become a competent playmaker(although a little too late since Duncan and Manu are near the end of their careers).

Your argument against Kobe is weak sauce--Shaq had super stacked teams in Orlando and LA and didn't win sh*t until Kobe blossomed into a star.

Shaq winning in 2000 had less to do with Kobe and more to do with him having one of the most dominant seasons in NBA history. 2000 Kobe was pretty mediocre. A shitty .517 TS in the playoffs, bad defense,

2000 RAPM came out recently and Kobe was rated well below Vince Carter. A huge negative on defense and not as impactful as Carter on offense. It's safe to say you could replace Kobe with 2000 Vince and Lakers still win the title. Kobe "blossoming into a star" had very little to do with Shaq winning for the first time.

[Anaximandro1]

Both Parker and Manu deserve to be in the Hall of Fame (strong NBA career and international resume ... they've both done enough)

Probably because he wasn't that good? I have never argued on Parker's behalf. Always considered him a pretty awful point guard during Duncan's prime years.

Well, Parker was a teenager when he joined the Spurs in 2001.


Playoffs - From 2002 to 2007

Parker

- Games 100

- 101 points per 100 possessions (Superstar level 110 point per 100 possesions)

- Usage rate % of 26.6 (Superstar level 27.0)

- Minutes Played 36.3 (Superstar level 38.0)

- TS% 50.2 (Superstar level 55.0)

- AST% 24.5 (Superstar level PG 40.0 / SG 25.0)

- PER 15.3 (Superstar level 25.0)

- WS/48 0.070 (Superstar level 0.20)

Playoffs - From 2008 to 2013

Parker

- Games 73

- 107 points per 100 possessions (Superstar level 110 point per 100 possesions)

- Usage rate % 29.2 (Superstar level 27.0)

- Minutes Played 36.3 (Superstar level 38.0)

- TS% 53.5 (Superstar level 55.0)

- AST% 33.0 (Superstar level PG 40.0 / SG 25.0)

- PER 20.3 (Superstar level 25.0)

- WS/48 0.121 (Superstar level 0.20)

He's only recently started to become a competent playmaker(although a little too late since Duncan and Manu are near the end of their careers).

Parker is one of the best guards in the league over the last six years. Unfortunately, Parker improvement is not enough to offset huge declines in Duncan's production.


Playoffs - From 2002 to 2007

Duncan

- 99 games

- 113 points per 100 possessions

- Usage Rate% 29.3

- Minuted Played 39.6

- TS% 56.2

- PER 27.6

- WS/48 0.231

Playoffs From 2008 to 2013

Duncan

- 73 games

- 105 points per 100 possessions

- Usage Rate% 26.2

- Minutes Played 35.8

- TS% 51.6

- PER 21.4

- WS/48 0.137

[Dresta]

I seem to remember that Parker would routinely tear Nash to shreds in the playoffs, and this had a lot to do with Phoenix's inability to overcome the Spurs.

[SexSymbol]

Agreed, Parker is the best point guard of the last 7-8 years.

[fpliii]

Nope. Don't get me wrong, I like Parker's game, but most people prop him up to disparage Timmy.

[SexSymbol]

Probably because he wasn't that good? I have never argued on Parker's behalf. Always considered him a pretty awful point guard during Duncan's prime years. He's only recently started to become a competent playmaker(although a little too late since Duncan and Manu are near the end of their careers).



Shaq winning in 2000 had less to do with Kobe and more to do with him having one of the most dominant seasons in NBA history. 2000 Kobe was pretty mediocre. A shitty .517 TS in the playoffs, bad defense,

2000 RAPM came out recently and Kobe was rated well below Vince Carter. A huge negative on defense and not as impactful as Carter on offense. It's safe to say you could replace Kobe with 2000 Vince and Lakers still win the title. Kobe "blossoming into a star" had very little to do with Shaq winning for the first time.

Revisionist history at it's best

[rmt]

I seem to remember that Parker would routinely tear Nash to shreds in the playoffs, and this had a lot to do with Phoenix's inability to overcome the Spurs.

It was Duncan who gave PHX problems - that's why they eventually tried Shaq.

03 Playoffs vs PHX
Duncan 18.7 pts / 16 rebs / 5.2 assts / 3.5 blks 52.1%
Parker 13.5 pts / 2 rebs / 2.5 assts / 1.3 stl 39.8%

05 Playoffs vs PHX
Duncan 27.4 pts / 13.8 rebs / 3.2 assts / 1.8 blks 52.7%
Parker 20.4 pts / 3 rebs / 4.2 assts / 1.2 stl 45.9%

07 Playoffs vs PHX
Duncan 26.8 pts / 13.7 rebs / 1.2 assts / 4.2 blks 57.3%
Parker 20.8 pts / 2.8 rebs / 5.7 assts / 1 stl 45.2%

08 Playoffs vs PHX
Duncan 24.8 pts / 13.8 rebs / 2.6 assts / 2.4 blks 49.5%
Parker 29.6 pts / 3.4 rebs / 7 assts / 1.4 stl 52.3%

10 Playoffs vs PHX
Duncan 20.3 pts / 10.5 rebs / 2.5 assts / 2.8 blks 55.2%
Parker 19.5 pts / 4 rebs / 5 assts 47.9%

Only in 08 playoffs did Parker out-perform Duncan OFFENSIVELY.

[fpliii]

It was Duncan who gave PHX problems - that's why they eventually tried Shaq.

03 Playoffs vs PHX
Duncan 18.7 pts / 16 rebs / 5.2 assts / 3.5 blks 52.1%
Parker 13.5 pts / 2 rebs / 2.5 assts / 1.3 stl 39.8%

05 Playoffs vs PHX
Duncan 27.4 pts / 13.8 rebs / 3.2 assts / 1.8 blks 52.7%
Parker 20.4 pts / 3 rebs / 4.2 assts / 1.2 stl 45.9%

07 Playoffs vs PHX
Duncan 26.8 pts / 13.7 rebs / 1.2 assts / 4.2 blks 57.3%
Parker 20.8 pts / 2.8 rebs / 5.7 assts / 1 stl 45.2%

08 Playoffs vs PHX
Duncan 24.8 pts / 13.8 rebs / 2.6 assts / 2.4 blks 49.5%
Parker 29.6 pts / 3.4 rebs / 7 assts / 1.4 stl 52.3%

10 Playoffs vs PHX
Duncan 20.3 pts / 10.5 rebs / 2.5 assts / 2.8 blks 55.2%
Parker 19.5 pts / 4 rebs / 5 assts 47.9%

Only in 08 playoffs did Parker out-perform Duncan OFFENSIVELY.

[Euroleague]

Spanoulis is better.

[bizil]

"They can talk about Jason Kidd, Steve Nash, Deron Williams and Chris Paul. I still have the most rings." -Tony Parker



I think he would get more praise if he was American.

No doubt Tony Parker is a sure fire HOFer. GOAT wise, I think he's in the top 15 to 20 PG's ever. And he's only 31 years old. So when its all said and done, he might get in the top 10 GOAT PG's. But in comparison to the PG's he named, ALL OF THEM are better floor generals than Tony. Tony is really a shoot first or maybe even a combo style of PG. Kind of like the guys like Rose and Westrbook. Hell if those guys were coached by a Larry Brown, there's a good chance he would move those three to SG like he did Iverson. And that's isn't a bad thing. But at PG, there is a certain premium I place on being a QB. Paul, Williams, and Nash prove that u can be a pass first PG and still be an alpha dog level scorer when they choose to. But GOAT wise, Nash and Kidd are the only two he takes a backseat to in that early 2000s era post Stockton and Payton.