2015 Anger General Greatest post-merger Players of All Time #40

[wailuaFC]

I'll be the first to admit that I am not and never will be a fan of Tony Parker. It is something about him that I just don't care for. however, I can't think of a single active player that doesn't get his just dues the way that TP doesn't. Dude was having not just a great season but an MVP season in 2012-13 until the high ankle sprain took him out for like a month.

He's worked hard to become a much better well rounded offensive player. It may not be the most conventional situation but he clearly has been every bit as important, and at times more, to their success than any other player on the roster in this decade.

I think you will find the following numbers very startling.

They are the offensive and defensive ratings numbers for each of the big 3 for the entirety of the playoff runs for the Spurs 4 title winning teams when the big 3 of Duncan, Parker and Manu were together. They really are startling. This is not the regular seasons or just the finals, but the entirety of the four title year playoff runs.

2003

Duncan: off rating - 116 def rating 92 NET DIFFERENCE + 24
Gino: off rating - 107 def rating 97 NET DIFFERENCE + 10
Parker - off rating 96 def rating 102 NET DIFFERENCE - 6


2005

Duncan off rating 111 def rating 101 NET DIFFERENCE +10
Manu off rating 124 def rating 104 NET DIFFERENCE +20
Parker off rating 98 def rating 109 NET DIFFERENCE -11


2007

Duncan off rating 111 def rating 98 NET DIFFERENCE +13
Manu off rating 112 def rating 100 NET DIFFERENCE +12
Parker off rating 103 def rating 107 NET DIFFERENCE -4


2014

Duncan off rating 120 def rating 104 NET DIFFERENCE +16
Manu off rating 118 def rating 106 NET DIFFERENCE +12
Parker off rating 103 def rating 109 NET DIFFERENCE -6
Leonard off rating 119 def rating 101 NET DIFFERENCE +18 . Truly a coming out party for Kawhi.

Those are very startling numbers and they 'mostly' confirm what I witnessed. In particular Duncan dominating in 2003 and also Manu'sicredible 2005 playoffs, especially in some earlier rounds.

That's really interesting, thanks for sharing those. I always knew he was a bit of a sieve defensively because of his physical limitations, sure helps to have Timmy back there cleaning up his mess though

[Odogg]

Grizz just destroyed Parker.

[vcsgrizzfan]

I'll be the first to admit that I am not and never will be a fan of Tony Parker. It is something about him that I just don't care for. however, I can't think of a single active player that doesn't get his just dues the way that TP doesn't. Dude was having not just a great season but an MVP season in 2012-13 until the high ankle sprain took him out for like a month.

He's worked hard to become a much better well rounded offensive player. It may not be the most conventional situation but he clearly has been every bit as important, and at times more, to their success than any other player on the roster in this decade.

I think you will find the following numbers very startling.

They are the offensive and defensive ratings numbers for each of the big 3 for the entirety of the playoff runs for the Spurs 4 title winning teams when the big 3 of Duncan, Parker and Manu were together. They really are startling. This is not the regular seasons or just the finals, but the entirety of the four title year playoff runs.

2003

Duncan: off rating - 116 def rating 92 NET DIFFERENCE + 24
Gino: off rating - 107 def rating 97 NET DIFFERENCE + 10
Parker - off rating 96 def rating 102 NET DIFFERENCE - 6


2005

Duncan off rating 111 def rating 101 NET DIFFERENCE +10
Manu off rating 124 def rating 104 NET DIFFERENCE +20
Parker off rating 98 def rating 109 NET DIFFERENCE -11


2007

Duncan off rating 111 def rating 98 NET DIFFERENCE +13
Manu off rating 112 def rating 100 NET DIFFERENCE +12
Parker off rating 103 def rating 107 NET DIFFERENCE -4


2014

Duncan off rating 120 def rating 104 NET DIFFERENCE +16
Manu off rating 118 def rating 106 NET DIFFERENCE +12
Parker off rating 103 def rating 109 NET DIFFERENCE -6
Leonard off rating 119 def rating 101 NET DIFFERENCE +18 . Truly a coming out party for Kawhi.

Those are very startling numbers and they 'mostly' confirm what I witnessed. In particular Duncan dominating in 2003 and also Manu'sicredible 2005 playoffs, especially in some earlier rounds.

That's really interesting, thanks for sharing those. I always knew he was a bit of a sieve defensively because of his physical limitations, sure helps to have Timmy back there cleaning up his mess though

You're welcome. My hunch was that Duncan and Gino would look better than Parker, especially in 2003 and 2005. I was shocked at how poorly Tony looked overall though. I knew some of the warts of course like the lack of range to the 3 point line and not going to the line enough per FGA which make his overall FG% numbers deceiving but I'm still shocked he looked so poor with this metric.

In fact, I think in each of the 4 title runs, he was dead last among all the Spurs who played the five most minutes. I would never have guessed that.

[Y2K]

I'll be the first to admit that I am not and never will be a fan of Tony Parker. It is something about him that I just don't care for. however, I can't think of a single active player that doesn't get his just dues the way that TP doesn't. Dude was having not just a great season but an MVP season in 2012-13 until the high ankle sprain took him out for like a month.

He's worked hard to become a much better well rounded offensive player. It may not be the most conventional situation but he clearly has been every bit as important, and at times more, to their success than any other player on the roster in this decade.

I think you will find the following numbers very startling.

They are the offensive and defensive ratings numbers for each of the big 3 for the entirety of the playoff runs for the Spurs 4 title winning teams when the big 3 of Duncan, Parker and Manu were together. They really are startling. This is not the regular seasons or just the finals, but the entirety of the four title year playoff runs.

2003

Duncan: off rating - 116 def rating 92 NET DIFFERENCE + 24
Gino: off rating - 107 def rating 97 NET DIFFERENCE + 10
Parker - off rating 96 def rating 102 NET DIFFERENCE - 6


2005

Duncan off rating 111 def rating 101 NET DIFFERENCE +10
Manu off rating 124 def rating 104 NET DIFFERENCE +20
Parker off rating 98 def rating 109 NET DIFFERENCE -11


2007

Duncan off rating 111 def rating 98 NET DIFFERENCE +13
Manu off rating 112 def rating 100 NET DIFFERENCE +12
Parker off rating 103 def rating 107 NET DIFFERENCE -4


2014

Duncan off rating 120 def rating 104 NET DIFFERENCE +16
Manu off rating 118 def rating 106 NET DIFFERENCE +12
Parker off rating 103 def rating 109 NET DIFFERENCE -6
Leonard off rating 119 def rating 101 NET DIFFERENCE +18 . Truly a coming out party for Kawhi.

Those are very startling numbers and they 'mostly' confirm what I witnessed. In particular Duncan dominating in 2003 and also Manu'sicredible 2005 playoffs, especially in some earlier rounds.

Those #s don't REALLY surprise me. TP has never been a reliable impactful defensive player...or positively impactful at all.

I previously stated before how Manu could have won FMVP in 2005. He was playing that well and had come that far along from 2003. He gets mad kudos from me for accepting his role even though his individual talent exceeded the roles in many years.

[Y2K]

I think you will find the following numbers very startling.

They are the offensive and defensive ratings numbers for each of the big 3 for the entirety of the playoff runs for the Spurs 4 title winning teams when the big 3 of Duncan, Parker and Manu were together. They really are startling. This is not the regular seasons or just the finals, but the entirety of the four title year playoff runs.

2003

Duncan: off rating - 116 def rating 92 NET DIFFERENCE + 24
Gino: off rating - 107 def rating 97 NET DIFFERENCE + 10
Parker - off rating 96 def rating 102 NET DIFFERENCE - 6


2005

Duncan off rating 111 def rating 101 NET DIFFERENCE +10
Manu off rating 124 def rating 104 NET DIFFERENCE +20
Parker off rating 98 def rating 109 NET DIFFERENCE -11


2007

Duncan off rating 111 def rating 98 NET DIFFERENCE +13
Manu off rating 112 def rating 100 NET DIFFERENCE +12
Parker off rating 103 def rating 107 NET DIFFERENCE -4


2014

Duncan off rating 120 def rating 104 NET DIFFERENCE +16
Manu off rating 118 def rating 106 NET DIFFERENCE +12
Parker off rating 103 def rating 109 NET DIFFERENCE -6
Leonard off rating 119 def rating 101 NET DIFFERENCE +18 . Truly a coming out party for Kawhi.

Those are very startling numbers and they 'mostly' confirm what I witnessed. In particular Duncan dominating in 2003 and also Manu'sicredible 2005 playoffs, especially in some earlier rounds.

That's really interesting, thanks for sharing those. I always knew he was a bit of a sieve defensively because of his physical limitations, sure helps to have Timmy back there cleaning up his mess though

You're welcome. My hunch was that Duncan and Gino would look better than Parker, especially in 2003 and 2005. I was shocked at how poorly Tony looked overall though. I knew some of the warts of course like the lack of range to the 3 point line and not going to the line enough per FGA which make his overall FG% numbers deceiving but I'm still shocked he looked so poor with this metric.

In fact, I think in each of the 4 title runs, he was dead last among all the Spurs who played the five most minutes. I would never have guessed that.

Personally, I think that Manu is the better player than Parker....have thought so for many years.

Btw, I didn't think that TP looked that bad on the defensive side until seeing the #s that you posted.

[vcsgrizzfan]

That's really interesting, thanks for sharing those. I always knew he was a bit of a sieve defensively because of his physical limitations, sure helps to have Timmy back there cleaning up his mess though

You're welcome. My hunch was that Duncan and Gino would look better than Parker, especially in 2003 and 2005. I was shocked at how poorly Tony looked overall though. I knew some of the warts of course like the lack of range to the 3 point line and not going to the line enough per FGA which make his overall FG% numbers deceiving but I'm still shocked he looked so poor with this metric.

In fact, I think in each of the 4 title runs, he was dead last among all the Spurs who played the five most minutes. I would never have guessed that.

Personally, I think that Manu is the better player than Parker....have thought so for many years.

Btw, I didn't think that TP looked that bad on the defensive side until seeing the #s that you posted.

I agree. People do give Manu props, but not to the extent he deserves. The entire playoffs in 2005 he was incredible.

People bitch that he flops, but that guy plays with courage. He knows he's going to get clocked a lot of the times but goes into the heavy timber anyway. He's got big stones and is never afraid of the moment. Doesn't mean he will always come through but he won't have his nuts shrivel up.

[PhutureDynasty]

Stephen Curry.

[americaninfidel]

You're welcome. My hunch was that Duncan and Gino would look better than Parker, especially in 2003 and 2005. I was shocked at how poorly Tony looked overall though. I knew some of the warts of course like the lack of range to the 3 point line and not going to the line enough per FGA which make his overall FG% numbers deceiving but I'm still shocked he looked so poor with this metric.

In fact, I think in each of the 4 title runs, he was dead last among all the Spurs who played the five most minutes. I would never have guessed that.

Personally, I think that Manu is the better player than Parker....have thought so for many years.

Btw, I didn't think that TP looked that bad on the defensive side until seeing the #s that you posted.

I agree. People do give Manu props, but not to the extent he deserves. The entire playoffs in 2005 he was incredible.

People bitch that he flops, but that guy plays with courage. He knows he's going to get clocked a lot of the times but goes into the heavy timber anyway. He's got big stones and is never afraid of the moment. Doesn't mean he will always come through but he won't have his nuts shrivel up.

I considered nominating Ginobili before Parker but a lot of his accolades are non-NBA. Not sure that matters but I thought the FMVP put Parker ahead of him.

[Y2K]

Personally, I think that Manu is the better player than Parker....have thought so for many years.

Btw, I didn't think that TP looked that bad on the defensive side until seeing the #s that you posted.

I agree. People do give Manu props, but not to the extent he deserves. The entire playoffs in 2005 he was incredible.

People bitch that he flops, but that guy plays with courage. He knows he's going to get clocked a lot of the times but goes into the heavy timber anyway. He's got big stones and is never afraid of the moment. Doesn't mean he will always come through but he won't have his nuts shrivel up.

I considered nominating Ginobili before Parker but a lot of his accolades are non-NBA. Not sure that matters but I thought the FMVP put Parker ahead of him.

It's a double-edged sword. Manu has been a bench player for many years, limiting his mins and stats but he's still the better player. Tony plays more so he's in a better position to be more impactful offensively....hence the 2007 Finals.

[americaninfidel]

I agree. People do give Manu props, but not to the extent he deserves. The entire playoffs in 2005 he was incredible.

People bitch that he flops, but that guy plays with courage. He knows he's going to get clocked a lot of the times but goes into the heavy timber anyway. He's got big stones and is never afraid of the moment. Doesn't mean he will always come through but he won't have his nuts shrivel up.

I considered nominating Ginobili before Parker but a lot of his accolades are non-NBA. Not sure that matters but I thought the FMVP put Parker ahead of him.

It's a double-edged sword. Manu has been a bench player for many years, limiting his mins and stats but he's still the better player. Tony plays more so he's in a better position to be more impactful offensively....hence the 2007 Finals.

Agreed. I don't think either is unreasonable here, but I acknowledge I'm in the minority (and just perhaps a bit of a homer.)

[vcsgrizzfan]

I considered nominating Ginobili before Parker but a lot of his accolades are non-NBA. Not sure that matters but I thought the FMVP put Parker ahead of him.

It's a double-edged sword. Manu has been a bench player for many years, limiting his mins and stats but he's still the better player. Tony plays more so he's in a better position to be more impactful offensively....hence the 2007 Finals.

Agreed. I don't think either is unreasonable here, but I acknowledge I'm in the minority (and just perhaps a bit of a homer.)

Four rings don't happen by accident.

Pops can't get votes here but he's a huge part of those rings too.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Startling numbers indeed. Is there anything unique in them for such a disparity? Like did Pops deliberately keep Parker out there when Duncan wasn't?

Did the stats guy miss adding a zero or something? Were we ripping the wrong foreign PG from the Western Conference for the past 10 years for his atrocious defense?

[americaninfidel]

Startling numbers indeed. Is there anything unique in them for such a disparity? Like did Pops deliberately keep Parker out there when Duncan wasn't?

Did the stats guy miss adding a zero or something? Were we ripping the wrong foreign PG from the Western Conference for the past 10 years for his atrocious defense?

As wailua noted, having Tim Duncan behind you to clean up your mess goes a long damn way.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Startling numbers indeed. Is there anything unique in them for such a disparity? Like did Pops deliberately keep Parker out there when Duncan wasn't?

Did the stats guy miss adding a zero or something? Were we ripping the wrong foreign PG from the Western Conference for the past 10 years for his atrocious defense?

As wailua noted, having Tim Duncan behind you to clean up your mess goes a long damn way.

So having Amare, Boris Diaw, Channing Frye and Kurt Thomas is not as good?

[americaninfidel]

Startling numbers indeed. Is there anything unique in them for such a disparity? Like did Pops deliberately keep Parker out there when Duncan wasn't?

Did the stats guy miss adding a zero or something? Were we ripping the wrong foreign PG from the Western Conference for the past 10 years for his atrocious defense?

As wailua noted, having Tim Duncan behind you to clean up your mess goes a long damn way.

So having Amare, Boris Diaw, Channing Frye and Kurt Thomas is not as good?

Close but.....not even close.

[Y2K]

Startling numbers indeed. Is there anything unique in them for such a disparity? Like did Pops deliberately keep Parker out there when Duncan wasn't?

Did the stats guy miss adding a zero or something? Were we ripping the wrong foreign PG from the Western Conference for the past 10 years for his atrocious defense?

That's something that needs further researching Indeed. As subpar as TP is, I didn't think that he was that bad.

[vcsgrizzfan]

What's equally amazing is how Duncan, even at his age, still impacts the game.

Few have aged more gracefully.

[Robceltsfan]

What's equally amazing is how Duncan, even at his age, still impacts the game.

Few have aged more gracefully.

I don't think ANYONE has aged as well as him. With this many seasons on his legs, only Karl Malone seems to have been a comparable player as far as effectiveness goes.

What's funny though (and part of the genius of Coach Pop) is that after 18 seasons Duncan only has 45,832 regular season minutes played. After 18 seasons in Utah, prior to his one year in L.A., Malone had amassed 53,479 minutes. That's an incredible difference. Pop has definitely added years onto Timmy's career. That guy could probably play till he's 42 if he wanted.

[Y2K]

What's equally amazing is how Duncan, even at his age, still impacts the game.

Few have aged more gracefully.

I don't think ANYONE has aged as well as him. With this many seasons on his legs, only Karl Malone seems to have been a comparable player as far as effectiveness goes.

What's funny though (and part of the genius of Coach Pop) is that after 18 seasons Duncan only has 45,832 regular season minutes played. After 18 seasons in Utah, prior to his one year in L.A., Malone had amassed 53,479 minutes. That's an incredible difference. Pop has definitely added years onto Timmy's career. That guy could probably play till he's 42 if he wanted.

Pop not playing Duncan in extended minutes throughout a good part of his career, sitting him out games for rest as well as Tim being fortunate enough to not suffer major injuries is how he's been able to remain so effective at his age.

Duncan, Kareem and Karl Malone are the best 3 examples that come to mind when speaking on top quality longevity.

[vcsgrizzfan]

What's equally amazing is how Duncan, even at his age, still impacts the game.

Few have aged more gracefully.

I don't think ANYONE has aged as well as him. With this many seasons on his legs, only Karl Malone seems to have been a comparable player as far as effectiveness goes.

What's funny though (and part of the genius of Coach Pop) is that after 18 seasons Duncan only has 45,832 regular season minutes played. After 18 seasons in Utah, prior to his one year in L.A., Malone had amassed 53,479 minutes. That's an incredible difference. Pop has definitely added years onto Timmy's career. That guy could probably play till he's 42 if he wanted.

Pop not playing Duncan in extended minutes throughout a good part of his career, sitting him out games for rest as well as Tim being fortunate enough to not suffer major injuries is how he's been able to remain so effective at his age.

Duncan, Kareem and Karl Malone are the best 3 examples that come to mind when speaking on top quality longevity.

He had a season or two where he struggled with plantar fasciitis, but aside from that, Duncan has been pretty lucky health wise. He's also never let himself get too heavy.