Manu vs. McGrady revisited

[elementally morale]

Several years ago (it was either 4 or 5 I can't remember but I'll go with 5) there was a then-famous thread I started. It was about Tracy McGrady and Manu Ginobili. I argued back then the following:


i) Manu Ginobili is a better basketball player. Less physically talented individually, but knows more about the game and can dominate/contribute in more ways.

ii) I'd rather have Manu on my team because he may not be as good a 1st option but he can play in different situations and an be asked to lead the team, be the go-to guy and the decision maker at the end of games and at the same time you can also ask him to come off the bench.

iii) I'd rather have Manu because he comes much cheaper while on average he contributes nearly as much. (And a lot more with McGrady's injuriy history taken into account.)

iv) Manu would have a better career and will be considered a winner, be it NBA or FIBA as opposed to McGrady who will not be considered a winner.

v) I prefer Manu because he has a fire inside him, a fire of the kind he can contain -- but a fire still.



Of course I was ridiculed back then. I can remember a poster (miles berg) agreeing with me... and I think that was that. Here I'm asking the following:


1) Who do you think was/is the better player?
2) Who had the better career?
3) Who was the greater player in your opinion on an all-time list?
4) Who would you rather have in the 2010-2011 season?
5) Who was more worth it to get the contract he got with everything (fans, income made to team, merchandise, etc.) considered?


(I'm not asking which of these players had the better peak, we all know the answer to that question.)

[Brunch@Five]

TMac was a superstar, Manu is at best a second fiddle, a poor-mans early decade Kobe. Why even compare them?
Obviously Manu is great to have on any team because he's good in every role on the court. But I don't know if any team would rather have prime Manu over prime TMac on their team.

The answer to all your question except 4) is TMac

[elementally morale]

TMac was a superstar, Manu is at best a second fiddle, a poor-mans early decade Kobe. Why even compare them?
Obviously Manu is great to have on any team because he's good in every role on the court. But I don't know if any team would rather have prime Manu over prime TMac on their team.

The answer to all your question except 4) is TMac


Prime McGrady didn't last long. And I don't agree Manu is AT BEST second fiddle. Manu at best is a big time winner as the 1st option on the team of Argentina. Manu was clearly the Spurs 2nd best player this decade and I'm not sure he isn't still.

Manu in my opinion was easily worth the contracts he got. I can't say the same about McGrady.

And I'm sure I want someone on the team who is a very good 2nd fiddle instead of a dysfunctional franchise player (being also a lot more expensive). Because if we call McGrady a franchise player... where exactly did he take those franchises?

[Brunch@Five]

Prime McGrady didn't last long. And I don't agree Manu is AT BEST second fiddle. Manu at best is a big time winner as the 1st option on the team of Argentina. Manu was clearly the Spurs 2nd best player this decade and I'm not sure he isn't still.

So we count his team Argentina career too? FIBA BBall is too different from NBA to fairly assess it in a comparison. Manu never played as well as TMac did in the NBA.


Manu in my opinion was easily worth the contracts he got. I can't say the same about McGrady.
You did include "(fans, income made to team, merchandise, etc.) ", so TMac easily tops Manu here. It isn't even close.


And I'm sure I want someone on the team who is a very good 2nd fiddle instead of a dysfunctional franchise player (being also a lot more expensive). Because if we call McGrady a franchise player... where exactly did he take those franchises?

Manu needs another great player on his team to be successful. Manu on Orlando instead of TMac, and they do not make the playoffs. Manu on Houston instead of TMac and they still do not make it out of the first round.

[elementally morale]

The answer to all your question except 4) is TMac


My answers:


1) Who do you think was/is the better player?
Manu was the better player. McGrady had more individual dominance at his peak, but basketball is a team sport. Manu is a much much better team player.

2) Who had the better career?
Manu. Easily.


3) Who was the greater player in your opinion on an all-time list?
I don't know. McGrady's peak was very high but Manu won a lot. I'd call this even.


4) Who would you rather have in the 2010-2011 season?
Depends. Is there such a thing as a healthy McGrady? What is his contract going to be like?


5) Who was more worth it to get the contract he got with everything (fans, income made to team, merchandise, etc.) considered?
I'm not sure. From a basketball only standpoint, it has to be Manu. Everything considered... probably McGrady. He sold out a few arenas and put some fans in front of TV sets.

[elementally morale]

Manu on Orlando instead of TMac, and they do not make the playoffs. Manu on Houston instead of TMac and they still do not make it out of the first round.


You don't really know that, do you? manu never was in McGrady's shoes / situation. He was not asked to lead a team in the NBA. Could he have done that at his peak? Possibly. I'm not sure... but I'm not sure he couldn't have. He WAS able to do things internationally as the leader, wasn't he?

The problem with McGrady is that he was a franchise player. Had he never been one, I'd have no problems with him. But he was said to be able to take teams to the next level and make them contenders, and he failed too many times. Sure, he didn't have the best of luck either. But he was a more talented version of Kobe Bryant and has nothing to show for it.

[Abraham Lincoln]

TMac was a superstar, Manu is at best a second fiddle, a poor-mans early decade Kobe. Why even compare them?
Obviously Manu is great to have on any team because he's good in every role on the court. But I don't know if any team would rather have prime Manu over prime TMac on their team.

The answer to all your question except 4) is TMac

Early decade '01-'03 Kobe was a superstar. No worse than any active player.

[chains5000]

I don't think it's a fair comparison considering McGrady has been injured a lot the last 5 years.
Manu has been clearly better than him during that period.

[elementally morale]

I don't think it's a fair comparison considering McGrady has been injured a lot the last 5 years.
Manu has been clearly better than him during that period.

Being able to stay healthy still counts when you consider a career or a contract. But even when healthy, McGrady didn't take the teams he was on anywhere. At first (with Orlando) I thought it was bad luck (ans his team overachieved to begin with) but as time flew by McGrady failed to deliver the goods.

Again, had he not been a franchise player it wasn't half as bad as it is now. (And I have nothing against the guy. I don't like him but I don't dislike him either. He was perhaps the most talented player this decade, but definitely top 3.)

[ronnymac]

Maybe better in the last two years. Up till the 07-08 Season McGrady was the better overall player..

[Doranku]

I don't see how it can be argued that TMac had a better career than Manu. In his prime, TMac put up stellar numbers.. but really his prime only lasted for about 3 or 4 years. In those years, he couldn't even get his team to the second round. Manu on the other hand, was a key instrument for the Spurs during the decade in their championship runs, and had numerous big playoff games.

It's unfortunate that TMac battled so many injuries throughout his career, and if he had been healthy he would easily be ahead of Manu, but that's not how things played out. TMac won't be remembered for his superb prime years, he'll be remembered as the second coming of Grant Hill, while Manu will be remembered as a winner.

As for the questions..

1.) TMac in his prime was clearly better than Manu ever was, but I'd give the nod to Manu based on his consistency and the fact that he was a winner
2.) Manu, for the reasons listed above
3.) Depends on if you factor international basketball in. Given that Manu won at every level imaginable in basketball, I'd place him above TMac. Just NBA careers, I'm really not sure. Probably still give Manu the nod based on his performance in the finals against the Pistons
4.) Both look like they're never going to get healthy again... I'd pick Manu solely based on giving him a better chance to recover from injuries than TMac
5.) It depends on what kinda weight you place on the things like fans, income, and merchandise. Assuming they're all equal to winning and basketball performance, then it's TMac by a large margin. If these are just minor things, I'd say Manu considering all the things he has done for the Spurs over the decade.

[Jakeh008]

1) Who do you think was/is the better player? Obviously Mac was the better player no question and as for who is better now.... No one has seen mac really play yet. That is a question soon to be answered.


2) Who had the better career?
Statisticly Mac has had a much better carreer but Manu has championships.
The Champion wins everytime....


3) Who was the greater player in your opinion on an all-time list? Mac has 8 season with 50+ games on an elite level.
Manu only has 4 good season on a level not even that close to Macs
McGrady is much better on an all time list


4) Who would you rather have in the 2010-2011 season?
Once again this completely depends on how Tracy comes back.....



5) Who was more worth it to get the contract he got with everything (fans, income made to team, merchandise, etc.) considered?
Manu makes less then half of Mac
Unless his stats are half as bad he wins this one
Manu is worth what he is getting but Mac is only worth about 15(If he was playing at his normal level when he comes back)



Question-
1-Mac
2-Manu
3-Mac
4-N/A
5-Manu

[chains5000]

Being able to stay healthy still counts when you consider a career or a contract. But even when healthy, McGrady didn't take the teams he was on anywhere. At first (with Orlando) I thought it was bad luck (ans his team overachieved to begin with) but as time flew by McGrady failed to deliver the goods.

Again, had he not been a franchise player it wasn't half as bad as it is now. (And I have nothing against the guy. I don't like him but I don't dislike him either. He was perhaps the most talented player this decade, but definitely top 3.)
I totally agree.

[Big#50]

Manu is a better defender, shooter, passer and is clutch. TMAC could score a lot in his prime. Give Manu the same amount of shots and he'll score 30 a game as well.

Manu>TMAC

[SayTownRy]

Manu is a better defender, shooter, passer and is clutch. TMAC could score a lot in his prime. Give Manu the same amount of shots and he'll score 30 a game as well.

Manu>TMAC

this always gets overlooked with great spurs players. the spurs have always been a low scoring team that shares the load.

there's a team outlook at play, lots of sharing the ball, not one go to guy every single night who's forced to take shots.

and to further the point that manu could score as much as mcgrady if he had the FGA, manu has the better FG% and 3pt FG%. manu on his career has averaged 10.3 FGA, where as mcgrady has averaged 18.3. mcgrady has scored 7 more ppg than manu on 8 more shots per game over the span of his career.

[Hyman]

1)Ginobili
2)Ginobili
3)Ginobili
4)Ginobili
5)Ginobili

Manu has been the second best SG of the last decade only behind Bryant. Prime Ginobili was a much better player than prime T-Mac

[niko]

this always gets overlooked with great spurs players. the spurs have always been a low scoring team that shares the load.

there's a team outlook at play, lots of sharing the ball, not one go to guy every single night who's forced to take shots.

and to further the point that manu could score as much as mcgrady if he had the FGA, manu has the better FG% and 3pt FG%. manu on his career has averaged 10.3 FGA, where as mcgrady has averaged 18.3. mcgrady has scored 7 more ppg than manu on 8 more shots per game over the span of his career.

If Manu had the FG attempts (and played as much) as McGrady he'd be hurt even more of the time. People have to stop talking about Manu's limited playing time as if it's a function of how efficient he is, it's a function of how fragile he is.

[wang4three]

At their best it was certianly McGrady. There was nothing Manu really did that I couldn't see Tracy doing as good if not supremely better.

Obviously in regards to longevity, T-Mac's body has made his comparison legit now, but I'd still take Tracy. He was a top 5 player for several years, Manu has never reached that once in his career. Fiba basketball aside.

[Brunch@Five]

We've seriously got guys saying prime Manu was better than prime TMac now? How quick people forget.

[robertshaw_1]

Ginobili in every aspect of the game.

Other Question?

[phoenix18]

I'll take T-mac.

[SayTownRy]

If Manu had the FG attempts (and played as much) as McGrady he'd be hurt even more of the time. People have to stop talking about Manu's limited playing time as if it's a function of how efficient he is, it's a function of how fragile he is.

people have to stop talking about manu's fragility too. up until last season and 4 or 5 games in the 08 playoffs manu has been very healthy.

Manu's playing percentages of total games per season:

1 - 84%
2 - 94%
3 - 90%
4 - 79%
5 - 91%
6 - 90%
7 - 53%
8 - 82% so far

that's an average of 83% of games played. really not too bad. take off 08 and this year (which is still pretty early in the season) and he's playing in almost 90% of all games. this doesn't even take into consideration the games he's played in during the summers where he's asked to be the number 1 option and has had tremendous success.

let's compare manu's 83% to some other elite shooting guards over the years.

vince carter - 70%
joe johnson - 72%
ray allen - 74%
tracy mcgrady - 74%
clyde drexler - 78%
kobe bryant - 85%
michael jordan - 87%
joe dumars - 88%

as you can see manu ranks above average when compared to these nba greats as far as percentage of games played over the course of the season.

his playing time is based somewhat on risk of injury (certainly not exclusively imo), but more so on the fact that manu only knows one speed and is extremely efficient while he is on the floor (hence his ridiculously high PER year in and year out among shooting guards).

[DC Zephyrs]

TMac was a better player individually, but would I rather have him on my team? Hell no. He requires way too much money to roster, and he has never proven himself to be a great first option on a winning team. Manu was much better at his role (second option/4th quarter closer) than TMac ever was at his.

[Poodle]

Several years ago (it was either 4 or 5 I can't remember but I'll go with 5) there was a then-famous thread I started. It was about Tracy McGrady and Manu Ginobili. I argued back then the following:


i) Manu Ginobili is a better basketball player. Less physically talented individually, but knows more about the game and can dominate/contribute in more ways.

ii) I'd rather have Manu on my team because he may not be as good a 1st option but he can play in different situations and an be asked to lead the team, be the go-to guy and the decision maker at the end of games and at the same time you can also ask him to come off the bench.

iii) I'd rather have Manu because he comes much cheaper while on average he contributes nearly as much. (And a lot more with McGrady's injuriy history taken into account.)

iv) Manu would have a better career and will be considered a winner, be it NBA or FIBA as opposed to McGrady who will not be considered a winner.

v) I prefer Manu because he has a fire inside him, a fire of the kind he can contain -- but a fire still.



Of course I was ridiculed back then. I can remember a poster (miles berg) agreeing with me... and I think that was that. Here I'm asking the following:


1) Who do you think was/is the better player?
2) Who had the better career?
3) Who was the greater player in your opinion on an all-time list?
4) Who would you rather have in the 2010-2011 season?
5) Who was more worth it to get the contract he got with everything (fans, income made to team, merchandise, etc.) considered?


(I'm not asking which of these players had the better peak, we all know the answer to that question.)


I like Manu a LOT and he is as unorthodox and amazing a player there is when he's on his game but TMac was easily one of the top 3-5 players in the league. Manu is rather inconsistent, doesn't get enough touches, shots, and PT game to game where he has the pressure of carrying the team like TMac or other superwstars have.

To me this is one of the biggest faults of playing for Popovich and the Spurs. Yeah Manu has rings but i'd argue he could've had a legacy much greater than he's had playing 6th man, 3rd option, and averaging 25 minutes on a championship team that flaunts no personal glory. Last night was a perfect example of this. Manu was AMAZING, 1 reb short of a triple double with like 4~ minutes in the game left and Popovich pulls Manu, then asks him if he cares where Manu waves him off. Of course he's not going to push to go back in for it after he got taken out but its ****ed up that they didn't let him have it just for having the game he had. ANY other coach would've let him get that TripleDouble in that situation. I was thinking no way those subs on the sides are pulling Manu 1reb short of a TripleDub, and sure enough Popovich pulls him. That 1 stat would've given Manu so much more recognition for the game he played last night, and now nobody barely knows.

I mean i want to agree with you because i think the world of Manu's game but TMac was on another level where he was the main man EVERY game, where as Manu only here and there. Its a shame really because he'll be forgotten just like most 6th men nobody cares about in hindsight but while its somehow politically correct to pretend like 6th men are just as good as starting, and how stats don't mean anything only rings. IN THIS CASE 6th man, stats, and the every game contribution does mean a lot if you want to pretend to compare his legacy with players that have that.

JUST want to emphasize i LOVE Manu's game tho...

[SCdac]

That 1 stat would've given Manu so much more recognition for the game he played last night, and now nobody barely knows.

But that's the beauty of all this in my opinion. In the grand scheme, Manu Ginobili is not about stats and personal accolades. He's the ultimate team player. Last night he wasn't hesitant to pass up his own shot for likes of a rookie or a brand new Spur. His unselfishness in itself should give him recognition... And it's not as if he's never started a game in his career (he's started 150+ games at least). Hell, in the 2005 Finals against DET and WCF against PHO he started every game and played some of the best basketball of his NBA career. Averaged like 21 PPG / 6 RPG / 4 APG on stellar percentages for the entire playoffs (dropped 30 PT games on both Melo's Nuggets and Ray Allen's sonics)... Manu is very much capable of being a starter, and we all know this because he's already done it.

[mrpuente]

http://www.nba.com/video/games/spurs/2009/12/29/0020900457_min_sas_recap.nba/index.html

Manu had some pretty spectacular passes.

it says that manu asked to be taken out before making his first triple double with 1 rebound away.

[Hyman]

Manu is the best SG of the decade after Kobe. He owns McGrady in most of the concepts of the game. Basketball is not only about stats and Ginobili is one of the best basketball players i've seen with my eyes

Now he is at the decline of his carreer, but prime Manu was much more than 20 points per game

[WeaponX2024]

I'll take Ginobili, even if McGrady was the better talent, I'll still take Ginobili because he had EVERYTHING, I mean everything you wanted in a championship player and for a championship team. Ginobili had the better career, but nobody can deny how dominant McGrady was during his prime years. Everybody knows that if Tmac was more of a team player and had the same type of desire a guy like Kobe Bryant had, he would have been one of the best, if not the best. But he didn't have that.

[Poodle]

But that's the beauty of all this in my opinion. In the grand scheme, Manu Ginobili is not about stats and personal accolades. He's the ultimate team player. Last night he wasn't hesitant to pass up his own shot for likes of a rookie or a brand new Spur. His unselfishness in itself should give him recognition... And it's not as if he's never started a game in his career (he's started 150+ games at least). Hell, in the 2005 Finals against DET and WCF against PHO he started every game and played some of the best basketball of his NBA career. Averaged like 21 PPG / 6 RPG / 4 APG on stellar percentages for the entire playoffs (dropped 30 PT games on both Melo's Nuggets and Ray Allen's sonics)... Manu is very much capable of being a starter, and we all know this because he's already done it.


problem is we don't all know it, mostly Spurs fans are the only one that knows it and those that watch them for whatecver reasons. most general NBA fans rely on consistent stats to measure the performance of players on teams they don't watch or follow. Its not beauty imo, its a shame really, because in terms of legacy Manu will never get the recognition he deserves.

Honestly Manu could've been a very great player iin the league, i mean possibly superstar or borderline superstar if he were played as a playmaking starter game to game. It DOES hurt his legacy and threads like this where people try and compare him to superstars. I just don't think its the good thing a lot of people try and jsutify it as.

[Rekindled]

manu everyday and twice on sundays.

[Poodle]

http://www.nba.com/video/games/spurs/2009/12/29/0020900457_min_sas_recap.nba/index.html

Manu had some pretty spectacular passes.

it says that manu asked to be taken out before making his first triple double with 1 rebound away.


i'm really wondering at what point Manu could've asked to be taken out. I don't buy this at all since i don't recall seeing Manu say anything to Popovich, and he was playing his ass off every second he was on the floor prior to that, not near Popovich on the sideline chatting.

Now that i think about it that doesn't even make sense considering Popovich asked Manu if he wanted to go back in for the reb right after Manu walked over to the sidelines. he wouldn't have asked that if Manu requested to be taken out. that was just dumb tho, if anyone ever deserved that stat it was Manu last night.

[Jacks3]

Comparing Prime Manu to Prime T-Mac is a ****ing joke. Prime T-Mac was putting 30+/5+/5+ every night. Manu has never come remotely close to that. :oldlol: @ this comparison.

[EricForman]

Several years ago (it was either 4 or 5 I can't remember but I'll go with 5) there was a then-famous thread I started. It was about Tracy McGrady and Manu Ginobili. I argued back then the following:


i) Manu Ginobili is a better basketball player. Less physically talented individually, but knows more about the game and can dominate/contribute in more ways.

ii) I'd rather have Manu on my team because he may not be as good a 1st option but he can play in different situations and an be asked to lead the team, be the go-to guy and the decision maker at the end of games and at the same time you can also ask him to come off the bench.

iii) I'd rather have Manu because he comes much cheaper while on average he contributes nearly as much. (And a lot more with McGrady's injuriy history taken into account.)

iv) Manu would have a better career and will be considered a winner, be it NBA or FIBA as opposed to McGrady who will not be considered a winner.

v) I prefer Manu because he has a fire inside him, a fire of the kind he can contain -- but a fire still.



Of course I was ridiculed back then. I can remember a poster (miles berg) agreeing with me... and I think that was that. Here I'm asking the following:


1) Who do you think was/is the better player?
2) Who had the better career?
3) Who was the greater player in your opinion on an all-time list?
4) Who would you rather have in the 2010-2011 season?
5) Who was more worth it to get the contract he got with everything (fans, income made to team, merchandise, etc.) considered?


(I'm not asking which of these players had the better peak, we all know the answer to that question.)


i agreed with you too at the time.

[EricForman]

TMac was a superstar, Manu is at best a second fiddle, a poor-mans early decade Kobe. Why even compare them?
Obviously Manu is great to have on any team because he's good in every role on the court. But I don't know if any team would rather have prime Manu over prime TMac on their team.

The answer to all your question except 4) is TMac


so you're saying Tmac has had a better career than Manu? 3 rings, second best player on two of them. Probably the real Finals MVP in 05. The go-to guy and crunch time decision maker for the Spurs (he handles the ball at the halfcourt line and makes hte move everytime in the final seconds of a half or a game) for two title runs

[SCdac]

problem is we don't all know it, mostly Spurs fans are the only one that knows it and those that watch them for whatecver reasons. most general NBA fans rely on consistent stats to measure the performance of players on teams they don't watch or follow. Its not beauty imo, its a shame really, because in terms of legacy Manu will never get the recognition he deserves.

Honestly Manu could've been a very great player iin the league, i mean possibly superstar or borderline superstar if he were played as a playmaking starter game to game. It DOES hurt his legacy and threads like this where people try and compare him to superstars. I just don't think its the good thing a lot of people try and jsutify it as.

Eh, all this is merely your opinion. It's like you're saying, "I do think he's an amazing player, but nobody should call him what he is because he didn't get a triple double or wow people with his stats, etc, etc". Ok, so box-score fans don't know about what kind of player he is, that's their loss, not his. Fans don't vote for the HOF, and I think Manu has a semi-decent shot at it when you consider his international accomplishments combined with his three NBA titles. Manu Ginobili is undoubtedly getting his jersey raised in the AT&T center when he retires, that in itself is an honor.

[Poodle]

Eh, all this is merely your opinion. It's like you're saying, "I do think he's an amazing player, but nobody should call him what he is because he didn't get a triple double or wow people with his stats, etc, etc". Ok, so box-score fans don't know about what kind of player he is, that's their loss, not his. Fans don't vote for the HOF, and I think Manu has a semi-decent shot at it when you consider his international accomplishments combined with his three NBA titles. Manu Ginobili is undoubtedly getting his jersey raised in the AT&T center when he retires, that in itself is an honor.


Just look at this thread, and how many people will even take seriously a comparison between TMac and Manu. You're in denial if you think 6th men, 25 minute off the bench players, and 3rd options are thought as highlly of as starter superstar 1st options that carry a team game to game. Seriously its just common sense. I KNOW you're in denial if you think Manu has a better chance at the HoF than TMac or any starting 1st option player. Manu is barely considered a great player by most NBA fans, definitely not a superstar, and its unbelievable how a lot of you can't accept that reality because its plain as day if you get outside of San Antonio.

I mean sure you can say he's the ultimate team player and take comfort in the rings but just realize that comes at the expense of his own legacy and what he was his talent could've been capable of. Its not a win -win like a lot of you are painting if you're practical about this and willing to accept the good with the bad. Just don't pretend its all good, or else you wouldn't have a tough time trying to convince people his name belongs with the superstars, now or the future. And frankly i don't blame them, Manu only shows up heere and there, he's oftentimes a ghost, but again that comes with not being front and center of a team.

[mrpuente]

"With about 6 1/2 minutes to go against the Timberwolves on Tuesday night, Spurs coach Gregg Popovich called Keith Bogans back to the bench from the scorer's table.
At that point, with the Spurs ahead by 24 points and on their way to a 117-99 win over Minnesota at AT&T Center, Popovich apparently became a fan. He wanted to see if Manu Ginobili could get his first career triple-double, so Popovich changed his mind about Bogans subbing for Ginobili. And at the next timeout, with Ginobili still one rebound away from the triple-double, Popovich brought up the career milestone and asked him if he wanted to stay in.
"We talked about that," Popovich admitted.
But Ginobili shook his head at Popovich's offer, and he sat on the bench for the rest of the night.
Though his numbers have lagged at points this season, the effort Ginobili put forth on Tuesday to shade the triple-double figure was no surprise -- 14 points, 10 assists and nine rebounds in 27 1/2 minutes off the bench.
And his shaking off Popovich's offer was no surprise either.
"We all know how Manu is, and that's how everybody on the team tries to be -- unselfish," Roger Mason Jr. said. "We all wanted Manu in there to try to get [the triple-double], but he's not worried about statistics."

http://www.nba.com/games/20091229/MINSAS/gameinfo.html?ls=gt2hp0020900457

Now Im not saying that exactly what happened Im just saying that what I read, and Im assuming to be true.

[EricForman]

Just look at this thread, and how many people will even take seriously a comparison between TMac and Manu. You're in denial if you think 6th men, 25 minute off the bench players, and 3rd options are thought as highlly of as starter superstar 1st options that carry a team game to game. Seriously its just common sense. I KNOW you're in denial if you think Manu has a better chance at the HoF than TMac or any starting 1st option player. Manu is barely considered a great player by most NBA fans, definitely not a superstar, and its unbelievable how a lot of you can't accept that reality because its plain as day if you get outside of San Antonio.



That's because most NBA casual fans are idiots. Every analyst or sports writer thinks highly of Manu.

and Tmac have a better chance at HOF? Please. Manu was the second (not third) best player on two title teams (three titles in all) and the best player on a gold medal team that whupped Team USA's ass.

Tmac has numbers and nothing else. Nique has numbers and more. Bernard King has numbers and more. Every great swingman this decade, from Kobe to Ray Allen to Iverson to even his heartless cousin Vince, has done more. Sure Tmac's stats are nicer to look at than Ray Allen but Ray's had a better career too, easy.

If you're talking about one on one between two players in their primes, then yes, Tmac wins 99 games out of 100. Or if you're starting a team from absolute scratch and only have enough money to pay one good playera nd then a bunch of scrubs? Then sure, Tmac can carry a trash squad to 35 wins while Manu probably only manages 29. But in any ohter more realistic scenario--where you already have a team and need a piece to win, Manu wins you more games. He's done it enough times and Tmac has failed enough times for this to be more than just an opinion.

Watch the Spurs title runs. Manu is THE playmaker and ball handler in all crunchtime situations. Whenever there are final seconds left in a half or 4th quarter, Manu has the ball at halfcourt and he decides what to do--penetrate and layup? penetrate and kick? pull up three? Manu decides.

Tmac hasn't done jack. Numbers are just numbers. At the end of day you can name 30-40 players with "awesome numbers". Manu has 3 rings and a gold medal and was a key player for all of them.

[Poodle]

"With about 6 1/2 minutes to go against the Timberwolves on Tuesday night, Spurs coach Gregg Popovich called Keith Bogans back to the bench from the scorer's table.
At that point, with the Spurs ahead by 24 points and on their way to a 117-99 win over Minnesota at AT&T Center, Popovich apparently became a fan. He wanted to see if Manu Ginobili could get his first career triple-double, so Popovich changed his mind about Bogans subbing for Ginobili. And at the next timeout, with Ginobili still one rebound away from the triple-double, Popovich brought up the career milestone and asked him if he wanted to stay in.
"We talked about that," Popovich admitted.
But Ginobili shook his head at Popovich's offer, and he sat on the bench for the rest of the night.
Though his numbers have lagged at points this season, the effort Ginobili put forth on Tuesday to shade the triple-double figure was no surprise -- 14 points, 10 assists and nine rebounds in 27 1/2 minutes off the bench.
And his shaking off Popovich's offer was no surprise either.
"We all know how Manu is, and that's how everybody on the team tries to be -- unselfish," Roger Mason Jr. said. "We all wanted Manu in there to try to get [the triple-double], but he's not worried about statistics."

http://www.nba.com/games/20091229/MINSAS/gameinfo.html?ls=gt2hp0020900457

Now Im not saying that exactly what happened Im just saying that what I read, and Im assuming to be true.


yeah i responded to this in another reply but Manu was already being taken out at the bench about to sit down when Popovich asked him and the subs were already in. How is he going to say "sure coach i want my tripledub" and then reverse what he just did? That just makes no sense to me. If Popovich really wanted him to get it or was as enamored with his play as ther article indicates he would've waited for him to get it before sending the sub in. Everyone was waiting/hoping for him to get that last board too.

I was shocked Popovich subbed him out at that moment. The way Manu was playing last night was just sick. Sad it only goes down as a everyday double double in hindsight :ohwell:

[Brunch@Five]

so you're saying Tmac has had a better career than Manu? 3 rings, second best player on two of them. Probably the real Finals MVP in 05. The go-to guy and crunch time decision maker for the Spurs (he handles the ball at the halfcourt line and makes hte move everytime in the final seconds of a half or a game) for two title runs

7 All-NBA teams, 1 MIP, 2 scoring titles, averages of 27/7/5 spanning his 7 prime seasons amount to a better career than 1 All NBA team and one 6th man award in my book.
I give Manu props for his great efficiency, but it's not that hard to be more efficient than a #1 option playing 40 minutes when you can come off the bench, feed off one of the best PFs ever in less than 30 minutes per game.

[EricForman]

7 All-NBA teams, 1 MIP, 2 scoring titles, averages of 27/7/5 spanning his 7 prime seasons amount to a better career than 1 All NBA team and one 6th man award in my book.
.

Funny you forget to mention three time NBA champion and gold medalist.

[Poodle]

That's because most NBA casual fans are idiots. Every analyst or sports writer thinks highly of Manu.

and Tmac have a better chance at HOF? Please. Manu was the second (not third) best player on two title teams (three titles in all) and the best player on a gold medal team that whupped Team USA's ass.

Tmac has numbers and nothing else. Nique has numbers and more. Bernard King has numbers and more. Every great swingman this decade, from Kobe to Ray Allen to Iverson to even his heartless cousin Vince, has done more. Sure Tmac's stats are nicer to look at than Ray Allen but Ray's had a better career too, easy.

If you're talking about one on one between two players in their primes, then yes, Tmac wins 99 games out of 100. But if you're starting a team and you can have either Manu or Tmac for ten years? Manu wins you more games. He's done it enough times and Tmac has failed enough times for this to be more than just an opinion.

Watch the Spurs title runs. Manu is THE playmaker and ball handler in all crunchtime situations. Whenever there are final seconds left in a half or 4th quarter, Manu has the ball at halfcourt and he decides what to do--penetrate and layup? penetrate and kick? pull up three? Manu decides.

Tmac hasn't done jack. Numbers are just numbers. At the end of day you can name 30-40 players with "awesome numbers". Manu has 3 rings and a gold medal and was a key player for all of them.


You're impractical and arguing with bias. TMac has made numerous Allstar games how many has Manu made? How often does rings only get someone into the HoF? How many 3rd options have made in to the HoF?

You can't pretend every non homer SA fan is a idiot because they don't watch the Spurs every game to know how good Manu is, whre his play doesn't always show up in the box scores.

Its just dumb arguing this with some of you because its just common sense if you follow NBA and are looking at this unbias. You can't pretend to have the best of every world between being unselfish and it being all about rings while each and every player earns their accolades and recognition due in relation to their talent. I mean be happy with the rings, but don't pretend Manu's legacy is anywhere near Superstar player night in night out monster numbers legacy....

[mrpuente]

yeah i responded to this in another reply but Manu was already being taken out at the bench about to sit down when Popovich asked him and the subs were already in. How is he going to say "sure coach i want my tripledub" and then reverse what he just did? That just makes no sense to me. If Popovich really wanted him to get it or was as enamored with his play as ther article indicates he would've waited for him to get it before sending the sub in. Everyone was waiting/hoping for him to get that last board too.

I was shocked Popovich subbed him out at that moment. The way Manu was playing last night was just sick. Sad it only goes down as a everyday double double in hindsight :ohwell:
I agree it would have been nice if he got the triple double

[Poodle]

Funny you forget to mention three time NBA champion and gold medalist.

don't forget vampire killer :cheers:

[1~Gibson~1]

TMac was a superstar, Manu is at best a second fiddle, a poor-mans early decade Kobe. Why even compare them?
Obviously Manu is great to have on any team because he's good in every role on the court. But I don't know if any team would rather have prime Manu over prime TMac on their team.

The answer to all your question except 4) is TMac
Manu had the better career.

Manu - 3 time NBA Champion
Tracy - Never passed the 1st round

:confusedshrug:

[Brunch@Five]

Funny you forget to mention three time NBA champion and gold medalist.

i didn't forget it, but I don't really see the relevance of FIBA play considering TMac has never played internationally. Manu's 3 rings as a supporting player are great and all, but there wasn't a single season he was even near Duncan as a player (in contrast to Shaq/Kobe for example). He at times carried the Spurs offensively, as has Parker, but Duncan has always been the best and most important player on the Spurs.

You're ranking Pippen over Barkley, DRob and Malone because of rings, too?

[Meticode]

You can argue all you want but Manu > McGrady. Manu killed a ****ing bat with his bare hands.

[EricForman]

You're impractical and arguing with bias. TMac has made numerous Allstar games how many has Manu made? How often does rings only get someone into the HoF? How many 3rd options have made in to the HoF?

I already answered this. Manu was the second option. And many believe he shuld have been 05 finals MVP. These type of things matter.


You can't pretend every non homer SA fan is a idiot because they don't watch the Spurs every game to know how good Manu is, whre his play doesn't always show up in the box scores.

I'm not. I'll agree most casual fans would say Tmac, but not every non SA fan would pick Tmac over Manu. And most analyst and writer think/speaks highly of Manu.


Its just dumb arguing this with some of you because its just common sense if you follow NBA and are looking at this unbias. You can't pretend to have the best of every world between being unselfish and it being all about rings while each and every player earns their accolades and recognition due in relation to their talent. I mean be happy with the rings, but don't pretend Manu's legacy is anywhere near Superstar player night in night out monster numbers legacy....

I'm not saying Manu was a better individual player than Tmac. Of course one on one Tmac wins. Of course Tmac is more talented. I'm talkin gabout winning basketball. Sometims it isn't about stats and talent. I'd honestly pick Eric Snow to run my team over Stephon Marbury, and this has been something I've been saying since 2002 (my friends used to ridicule me).

[Poodle]

I already answered this. Manu was the second option. And many believe he shuld have been 05 finals MVP. These type of things matter.



I'm not. I'll agree most casual fans would say Tmac, but not every non SA fan would pick Tmac over Manu. And most analyst and writer think/speaks highly of Manu.



I'm not saying Manu was a better individual player than Tmac. Of course one on one Tmac wins. Of course Tmac is more talented. I'm talkin gabout winning basketball. Sometims it isn't about stats and talent. I'd honestly pick Eric Snow to run my team over Stephon Marbury, and this has been something I've been saying since 2002 (my friends used to ridicule me).


for whats its worth i'd take Manu over TMac if i already had a great scorer on my roster. I'm not the biggest TMac fan at all. I think he's the highest maintenance brat player there has ever been in the league. He chucks idiot shots a lot but i can't deny his talent which is through the roof. Its probably more difficult to find a Manu type of player, but its kind of how i feel about David Lee in NY.

I mean i see what you're saying but those little things, and team ball won't earn him the accolades that will put him even with a TMac or the HoF....

and just to reiterate i LOVE Manu's game. when he's on his game i don't think there is a more enjoyable player for me to watch, maybe next to MJ.

[EricForman]

You're ranking Pippen over Barkley, DRob and Malone because of rings, too?

I don't. But let's hope Roundball Rock doesn't see this, he'll come in here telling me and you that not only is Pip better than Chuck, DRob and Malone, but Pip coulda won more rings with Mitch Richmond/Rik Smits/Kevin Johnson instead of with Jordan/Rodman or Horace.

[ShaqAttack3234]

1) Who do you think was/is the better player

McGrady up until 2008. T-Mac was playing at a Kobe-esque level at one point, particularly in 2003. He averaged 32.1 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.5 apg and 1.7 spg on 45.7% shooting(38.6 3P% on 6 attempts per game) and 79.3% free throw shooting.

McGrady's consistent teammates for the full season were Pat Garrity, Jacque Vaughn, Darrell Armstrong, an overweight 33 year old Shawn Kemp and Andrew DeClerq. He dragged them to 42 wins and took them to the 7th game of a playoff series vs Detroit although in the playoffs the lineup was a bit better than that with Drew Gooden and Gordan Giricek on the team.

McGrady was 6th in MVP voting the first year he was a first option, the next 2 seasons he was 4th, he'd have three more top 10 MVP finishes with Houston.

In 2004-2005 he averaged 26/6/6 in the regular season, won 51 games and played out of his mind in a 7 game playoff series averaging 31/7/7 on 46% shooting(37% 3P shooting).

In 2006-2007 Yao started off the season as an MVP candidate averaging 27/10 over the first 26 games before he was injured. McGrady led the Houston Rockets to a 20-10 record without Yao and he averaged 28/5/6 while leading a team of Rafer Alston, Luther Head, Shane Battier, Chuck Hayes and ancient versions of Dikembe Mutombo and Juwan Howard. That's the team he dragged to a 20-10 record in the West.

The following season, McGrady led a similar team after Yao was out with another injury. This time he led them to the final 10 or 12 wins of the second longest winning streak ever(22 games).

That's what everyone means when thye say McGrady was a superstar. He could put a team on his back and dominate games. Could Manu duplicate McGrady's feats? I highly doubt it. Could McGrady win titles as the 2nd or 3rd fiddle with a great big man like Duncan(top 10 player of all time) and a great coach like Popvich? I wouldn't doubt it.

McGrady could take over games and get you 40-50 on any given night, at 6'8" he could also play as a point guard/point forward and make plays for you every night(something he did a lot of in Orlando and Houston). He could get on incredible hot streaks from behind the 3 point line and his length/athleticism made him one of the best finishers in the league.

Better player right now? I can't answer that until I see McGrady play more. Although it wouldn't be that hard to top what Ginobili has done the last 2 seasons(when he's also been out with numerous injuries).


2) Who had the better career?

NBA career? McGrady. The scoring titles, All-NBA selections, MVP votes, overall numbers, all-star selections all back up what I've been saying about McGrady being the better player.

Overall career? Still McGrady because of how much tougher NBA competition is.


3) Who was the greater player in your opinion on an all-time list?

See above, McGrady.


4) Who would you rather have in the 2010-2011 season?

Can't answer that. McGrady hasn't had a chance to prove himself this year and Manu has been injury-prone and subpar when he has played.


5) Who was more worth it to get the contract he got with everything (fans, income made to team, merchandise, etc.) considered?

When you consider jersey sales, ticket sales, sneaker sales and all of that? Easily McGrady partially because of his Chinese fan base.

Manu was the perfect 2nd or 3rd option on San Antonio, but he simply wasn't a player in the same league as McGrady.

[Brunch@Five]

I don't. But let's hope Roundball Rock doesn't see this, he'll come in here telling me and you that not only is Pip better than Chuck, DRob and Malone, but Pip coulda won more rings with Mitch Richmond/Rik Smits/Kevin Johnson instead of with Jordan/Rodman or Horace.

let's hope for the best. :cheers:

[SCdac]

and just to reiterate i LOVE Manu's game. when he's on his game i don't think there is a more enjoyable player for me to watch, maybe next to MJ.

I respect your honestly, but it's things like this that sort of contradict everything you're saying... I mean, are you from San Antonio? are you a die-hard Spurs fan? Because, clearly, "only people from San Antonio" are the ones thinking highly of Manu.

[AirJordan23]

McGrady up until 2008. T-Mac was playing at a Kobe-esque level, particularly in 2003. He averaged 32.1 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.5 apg and 1.7 spg on 45.7% shooting(38.6 3P% on 6 attempts per game) and 79.3% free throw shooting.

McGrady's consistent teammates for the full season were Pat Garrity, Jacque Vaughn, Darrell Armstrong, an overweight 33 year old Shawn Kemp and Andrew DeClerq. He dragged them to 42 wins and took them to the 7th game of a playoff series vs Detroit although in the playoffs the lineup was a bit better than that with Drew Gooden and Gordan Giricek on the team.

McGrady was 6th in MVP voting the first year he was a first option, the next 2 seasons he was 4th, he'd have three more top 10 MVP finishes with Houston.

In 2004-2005 he averaged 26/6/6 in the regular season, won 51 games and played out of his mind in a 7 game playoff series averaging 31/7/7 on 46% shooting(37% 3P shooting).

In 2006-2007 Yao started off the season as an MVP candidate averaging 27/10 over the first 26 games before he was injured. McGrady led the Houston Rockets to a 20-10 record without Yao and he averaged 28/5/6 while leading a team of Rafer Alston, Luther Head, Shane Battier, Chuck Hayes and ancient versions of Dikembe Mutombo and Juwan Howard. That's the team he dragged to a 20-10 record in the West.

The following season, McGrady led a similar team after Yao was out with another injury. This time he led them to the final 10 or 12 wins of the second longest winning streak ever(22 games).

That's what everyone means when thye say McGrady was a superstar. He could put a team on his back and dominate games. Could Manu duplicate McGrady's feats? I highly doubt it. Could McGrady win titles as the 2nd or 3rd fiddle with a great big man like Duncan(top 10 player of all time) and a great coach like Popvich? I wouldn't doubt it.

McGrady could take over games and get you 40-50 on any given night, at 6'8" he could also play as a point guard/point forward and make plays for you every night(something he did a lot of in Orlando and Houston). He could get on incredible hot streaks from behind the 3 point line and his length/athleticism made him one of the best finishers in the league.

Better player right now? I can't answer that until I see McGrady play more. Although it wouldn't be that hard to top what Ginobili has done the last 2 seasons(when he's also been out with numerous injuries).



NBA career? McGrady. The scoring titles, All-NBA selections, MVP votes, overall numbers, all-star selections all back up what I've been saying about McGrady being the better player.

Overall career? Still McGrady because of how much tougher NBA competition is.



See above, McGrady.



Can't answer that. McGrady hasn't had a chance to prove himself this year and Manu has been injury-prone and subpar when he has played.



When you consider jersey sales, ticket sales, sneaker sales and all of that? Easily McGrady partially because of his Chinese fan base.

Manu was the perfect 2nd or 3rd option on San Antonio, but he simply wasn't a player in the same league as McGrady.
These are exactly my thoughts. Glad you said all of this because I was just about to take the time and write virtually the same thing you just said. :oldlol:

[Poodle]

I respect your honestly, but it's things like this that sort of contradict everything you're saying... I mean, are you from San Antonio, are you a die-hard Spurs fan? Because, clearly, "only people from San Antonio" are the ones thinking highly of Manu.

touche

[Disaprine]

:roll: at this thread :roll:

[mrpuente]

:roll: at this thread :roll:
:roll: at you

[Big#50]

If Manu had the FG attempts (and played as much) as McGrady he'd be hurt even more of the time. People have to stop talking about Manu's limited playing time as if it's a function of how efficient he is, it's a function of how fragile he is.
LOL Manu is starting to ball again. I thought TMAC would come back strong but he looks done. Manu has been injured from the end of the 08 season and end of 09. He is not fragile. The guy would get hammered every game.

[Big#50]

Comparing Prime Manu to Prime T-Mac is a ****ing joke. Prime T-Mac was putting 30+/5+/5+ every night. Manu has never come remotely close to that. :oldlol: @ this comparison.
I'll take 05 Manu over any version of TMAC.

[Big#50]

Just look at this thread, and how many people will even take seriously a comparison between TMac and Manu. You're in denial if you think 6th men, 25 minute off the bench players, and 3rd options are thought as highlly of as starter superstar 1st options that carry a team game to game. Seriously its just common sense. I KNOW you're in denial if you think Manu has a better chance at the HoF than TMac or any starting 1st option player. Manu is barely considered a great player by most NBA fans, definitely not a superstar, and its unbelievable how a lot of you can't accept that reality because its plain as day if you get outside of San Antonio.

I mean sure you can say he's the ultimate team player and take comfort in the rings but just realize that comes at the expense of his own legacy and what he was his talent could've been capable of. Its not a win -win like a lot of you are painting if you're practical about this and willing to accept the good with the bad. Just don't pretend its all good, or else you wouldn't have a tough time trying to convince people his name belongs with the superstars, now or the future. And frankly i don't blame them, Manu only shows up heere and there, he's oftentimes a ghost, but again that comes with not being front and center of a team.
MANU kicked team USA's ass. That team with all these so-called superstars.

[cotdt]

I don't care T-Mac still has more fans than Manu.

[spursdynasty420]

I don't care T-Mac still has more fans than Manu.

and we all know most fans = better player

[spree43]

I'd take Toni Kukoc over Reggie Miller

I mean, 3 championships as the third option, 6th man of the year

Must have had a better career

Jeez people are stupid nowadays

T-mac is on another tier to Ginobili

And whoever said they would take 2005 Ginobili over any tmac is daft

Here is what Manu scored in the last two months of his supposed best season

17, 19, 31, 6, missed 5 games, 14, 6, 11, 23, 18, 15, 13, 8, 16, 2, 40, 30, 21, 13, 16, 3

What does that say to you ... INCONSISTENCY

Lets look at Tmac over that same period (not his best season)

32, 26, 32, 35, 38, 22, 20, 19, 22, 15, 26, 31, 26, 44, 26, 21, 13, 44, 27, 34, 38, 23, 32, 16

CONSISTENCY

Its easy to sit behind an all-time great and occasionally step up with a big game, then when you score 2 points not get criticised for it because the team doesn't rely on you to win every game for them

Manu's level of consistency isnt good enough to be a superstar, sure he was perfect for his role, in that he wasnt selfish, but that doesnt make him better than Tmac

Get it together people

There was a period there where Tmac sh*t excellence, and dont pretend he only did it for two years

Manu entered the league in 02/03 and has had 4 seasons where he has averaged 15+ ppg and played at least 45 games and only one season over 17ppg

Tmac has done that 9 times, but he has also had 7 seasons where he has put up 24 points, 4 assists, 5 rebounds, 1.3 stls

[spursdynasty420]

I'd take Toni Kukoc over Reggie Miller

I mean, 3 championships as the third option, 6th man of the year

Must have had a better career

Jeez people are stupid nowadays

T-mac is on another tier to Ginobili

And whoever said they would take 2005 Ginobili over any tmac is daft

Here is what Manu scored in the last two months of his supposed best season

17, 19, 31, 6, missed 5 games, 14, 6, 11, 23, 18, 15, 13, 8, 16, 2, 40, 30, 21, 13, 16, 3

What does that say to you ... INCONSISTENCY

Lets look at Tmac over that same period (not his best season)

32, 26, 32, 35, 38, 22, 20, 19, 22, 15, 26, 31, 26, 44, 26, 21, 13, 44, 27, 34, 38, 23, 32, 16

CONSISTENCY

Its easy to sit behind an all-time great and occasionally step up with a big game, then when you score 2 points not get criticised for it because the team doesn't rely on you to win every game for them

Manu's level of consistency isnt good enough to be a superstar, sure he was perfect for his role, in that he wasnt selfish, but that doesnt make him better than Tmac

Get it together people

There was a period there where Tmac sh*t excellence, and dont pretend he only did it for two years

Manu entered the league in 02/03 and has had 4 seasons where he has averaged 15+ ppg and played at least 45 games and only one season over 17ppg

Tmac has done that 9 times, but he has also had 7 seasons where he has put up 24 points, 4 assists, 5 rebounds, 1.3 stls


turds like you look at ppg. manu is the prime example of why ppg doesnt mean a god damn thing. its about winning. its about being our closer in the 4th. manu is a better defender. better rebounder. better passer. better hustler. better winner. tmac is a better scorer. OH WOW!!! so tired of superstar nut huggers.


Italian League Championship: 2001 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
Italian Cup: 2001, 2002 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
Euroleague: 2001 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
Triple Crown: 2001 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
Americas Championship: 2001 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
NBA Championship: 2003, 2005, 2007 - outside of 2003 manu was the #1 option in the 4th he was our closer. narrow minded bafoons can cry all you want. watch more games
Summer Olympic Games gold medal: 2004 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
Summer Olympic Games bronze medal: 2008

[ShaqAttack3234]

its about winning.

Which has to do with what team you're on and your role on that team. Ginobili played with a top 10 player of all time in Duncan and another all-star caliber player in Parker. Meaning he was never the best player on an NBA team and the only season you could argue he was the first option offensively was 2008 and even then that team was still built around Duncan's post play.


its about being our closer in the 4th.

It's a lot easier to play in the 4th when you have guys like Duncan and Parker on your team and you didn't have to spend so much energy as the first option through the other 3 quarters. And lets not pretend that T-Mac didn't produce in the 4th quarter.


better rebounder.

:oldlol: No he's not. They're both about equal as rebounders, particularly prime T-Mac who was averaging over 6 per game.


better passer.

You just made this up. T-Mac is/was easily one of the best passing swingmen and a player who has not only averaged over 6 assists for an entire season, but proven himself capable of being his team's primary playmaker. He can set up his teammates and he's capable of making spectacular passes. Nothing other than blind homerism could make anyone say that Ginobili has seperated himself from McGrady in this area.


better winner.

Once again I destroyed this garbage. Put Ginobili in T-Mac's role and see how much he wins. Put T-Mac in Ginobili's role and at the very least the Spurs have a good chance at duplicating their success. Ginobili won a title as a rookie averaging single digit points and shooting under 40% in the playoffs. They were not in similar situations so comparing them as winners is unfair and just proves you have an agenda.

[spursdynasty420]

Which has to do with what team you're on and your role on that team. Ginobili played with a top 10 player of all time in Duncan and another all-star caliber player in Parker. Meaning he was never the best player on an NBA team and the only season you could argue he was the first option offensively was 2008 and even then that team was still built around Duncan's post play.



It's a lot easier to play in the 4th when you have guys like Duncan and Parker on your team and you didn't have to spend so much energy as the first option through the other 3 quarters. And lets not pretend that T-Mac didn't produce in the 4th quarter.



:oldlol: No he's not. They're both about equal as rebounders, particularly prime T-Mac who was averaging over 6 per game.



You just made this up. T-Mac is/was easily one of the best passing swingmen and a player who has not only averaged over 6 assists for an entire season, but proven himself capable of being his team's primary playmaker. He can set up his teammates and he's capable of making spectacular passes. Nothing other than blind homerism could make anyone say that Ginobili has seperated himself from McGrady in this area.



Once again I destroyed this garbage. Put Ginobili in T-Mac's role and see how much he wins. Put T-Mac in Ginobili's role and at the very least the Spurs have a good chance at duplicating their success. Ginobili won a title as a rookie averaging single digit points and shooting under 40% in the playoffs. They were not in similar situations so comparing them as winners is unfair and just proves you have an agenda.

everything you said is null because all you do is cry about the spurs in every thread. the only arguement you have thats valid is rebounding. it could go either way but i give the edge to ginobili. manu is 50x better passer then tmac. and yes BETTER WINNER BECAUSE OF ALL THE OTHER TITLES AND CHAMPIONSHIPS HE WON AS THE #1 OPTION YOU WORTHLESS FA GGOT. put tmac on the argentine team and they dont win ****

[ShaqAttack3234]

everything you said is null because all you do is cry about the spurs in every thread. the only arguement you have thats valid is rebounding. it could go either way but i give the edge to ginobili. manu is 50x better passer then tmac. and yes BETTER WINNER BECAUSE OF ALL THE OTHER TITLES AND CHAMPIONSHIPS HE WON AS THE #1 OPTION YOU WORTHLESS FA GGOT. put tmac on the argentine team and they dont win ****

How old are you? Since when do I hate on the Spurs? Because I think T-Mac is better than Ginobili and because I think Shaq is better than Duncan? :oldlol:

I don't care about international accomplishments. T-Mac hasn't had enough of an international career to compare. I don't care what YOU think T-Mac would do playing for Argentina either. It's meaningless.

And Manu being 50 times the passer T-Mac is, is nothing more than your biased opinion. You can't back that up.

So overall, your argument for Ginobili being better than T-Mac is weak. It's based 95% on hypotheticals and your opinions.

[spursdynasty420]

How old are you? Since when do I hate on the Spurs? Because I think T-Mac is better than Ginobili and because I think Shaq is better than Duncan? :oldlol:

I don't care about international accomplishments. T-Mac hasn't had enough of an international career to compare. I don't care what YOU think T-Mac would do playing for Argentina either. It's meaningless.

And Manu being 50 times the passer T-Mac is, is nothing more than your biased opinion. You can't back that up.

So overall, your argument for Ginobili being better than T-Mac is weak. It's based 95% on hypotheticals and your opinions.

prove that tmac is a better rebounder/passer/defender


and i call you out on the spurs because you are in every spurs thread talking ****. you never have anything good to say. its obvious

[ShaqAttack3234]

prove that tmac is a better rebounder/passer/defender

I never said he was a better defender. The numbers support him being atleast an equal if not a better passer and rebounder while scoring is not even a question. But a lot of it is subjective, you can't really prove any of it. However I can make a stronger case for my arguments. Nor is T-Mac's ability to be a number 1 option vs Ginobili(as evidenced by MVP voting, all-nba selections, all-star selections ect.)



and i call you out on the spurs because you are in every spurs thread talking ****. you never have anything good to say. its obvious

That's not true, I praise Duncan as being a top 10 player, Pop as being a great coach, Robinson as being a great player obviously during his prime and even later when he became the 2nd fiddle to Duncan.

[WeaponX2024]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sxa0mLPRhk

@3:45 and beyond. Listen to what the GM said. I really doubt that Tmac could win as many ships in Ginboili's rules. He's just too stubborn, He's really like a 6'8 Allen Iverson if you truly deep down think about it.

[spree43]

turds like you look at ppg. manu is the prime example of why ppg doesnt mean a god damn thing. its about winning. its about being our closer in the 4th. manu is a better defender. better rebounder. better passer. better hustler. better winner. tmac is a better scorer. OH WOW!!! so tired of superstar nut huggers.


Italian League Championship: 2001 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
Italian Cup: 2001, 2002 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
Euroleague: 2001 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
Triple Crown: 2001 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
Americas Championship: 2001 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
NBA Championship: 2003, 2005, 2007 - outside of 2003 manu was the #1 option in the 4th he was our closer. narrow minded bafoons can cry all you want. watch more games
Summer Olympic Games gold medal: 2004 - manu was the #1 option. he was a superstar
Summer Olympic Games bronze medal: 2008

Toni Kukoc was a better passer, better rebounder, maybe better defender, better winner and has more international experience than Allen Iverson by your logic, but we all know who was really better

What is your justification for Ginobili being a better passer than Tmac?
Are you saying he sees the floor better? Gets more assists? Because generally a better passer averages more assists because they can see the floor better

If you cant quantify your reasoning for Manu being better, then it is just your opinion and its not worth argueing with people because I know I'm right and you think you're right, so why bother banging our heads against a wall

But dont bring up what manu did in Europe, it means nothing in this arguement

[SayTownRy]

why does toni kukoc always get brought up in ginobili threads?

he was 4 inches taller than ginobili (that's 6' 10" if you're counting) and only grabbed .2 more rpg than ginobili. not a very flattering stat to bring up.

the assist differential is only .1 also..

these numbers are nominal. manu also has the better career scoring average.

and i think it's relevant to bring up manu's european career. mcgrady came into the league at 18 while manu didn't play nba ball till he was already 25. there's a lot of youth and athleticism that goes on between the ages of 18-25. in fact mcgrady put up his best scoring numbers at ages 23 and 24. to just take what manu has done at age 25 and after takes away from some serious successes he accomplished. you can't compare it directly to anything mcgrady did, but that doesn't necessarily mean you can just declare all those achievements as null either. it absolutely belongs in the discussion imo.

[class_act]

In my opinion there's not much of a correlation between number of assists and being a great passer. Too many people think they know something because they read some charted numbers. Basketball is a game and if you didn't watch the game, you can look at numbers till your blue in the face but you won't ever know much about players. I watch games and Manu Ginobili has made many of the best passes I've ever seen.

International basketball achievements should absolutely be considered, I don't see why any fan of basketball would argue that.

All-Star games should not be given much weight at all because it's just a popularity contest voted by masses of people that are half-way interested in basketball. The fact that Tracy McGrady is on pace to start the All-Star game even though he's been out this season is just a shapshot of it's ridiculousness (nothing against McGrady).


1) Who do you think was/is the better player?
Close, could argue either way, I pick Manu. McGrady was better at their peak, a better scorer, one of the best scorers in the league. Ginobili was a better defender, passer, and closer, one of the best closers in the league. Ginobili can contribute in more ways. It's hard to compare them, McGrady was held back by injury, Ginobili by coming off the bench. If he had landed on a different team, maybe he's the 1st option and becomes the white D-Wade, who's to say?

2) Who had the better career?
Ginobili hands down. Manu won at just about every level in Basketball. Won internationally with a Euroleague championship and a Triple Crown championship plus several MVP awards, won three NBA Championships, should've been 2005 Finals MVP, and was the 1st option on the Argentinian team that took down Team USA on the way to winning Gold at the 2004 olympics. McGrady, as good as he was, never made it out of the first round.

3) Who was the greater player in your opinion on an all-time list?
Tie.

4) Who would you rather have in the 2010-2011 season?
Tie if McGrady's actually good and healthy, otherwise Manu.

5) Who was more worth it to get the contract he got with everything (fans, income made to team, merchandise, etc.) considered?
Moneywise probably tie, except the Spurs walked away with Championships while the Rockets just walked away, so I'm going Manu.

[L.Kizzle]

This is a silly thread.

[spursdynasty420]

i think he is a better rebounder to. his tenacious ability to always find the ball

[bdreason]

McGrady was the better player (peak).

Manu had a better career (w/ credit to Duncan and TP).


Right now, I'de take Manu... but let's not act like he's Mr. Reliable. Even with monitored minutes Ginobili will probably go down with another injury at some point this season.

[L.Kizzle]

McGrady was the better player (peak).

Manu had a better career (w/ credit to Duncan and TP).


Right now, I'de take Manu... but let's not act like he's Mr. Reliable. Even with monitored minutes Ginobili will probably go down with another injury at some point this season.
Define career, what is a better career?

[EricForman]

Define career, what is a better career?


if guy A is known to be an underachiever and has never made it out of the first round while guy B is always getting raves from opposing coaches, analyst, and sportswriters ANd has three rings.

then guy B has the better career by any definition.

[L.Kizzle]

if guy A is known to be an underachiever and has never made it out of the first round while guy B is always getting raves from opposing coaches, analyst, and sportswriters ANd has three rings.

then guy B has the better career by any definition.
SOunds like Michael Finley, I guess Fin>Mac also right.

[spursdynasty420]

SOunds like Michael Finley, I guess Fin>Mac also right.

finley doesnt have 3 rings first of all. second of all hes never been the #1 option and carried his team to a gold medal a title or a championship

[Bigsmoke]

Manu might be a better perimeter defender than TMac but i do not think Manu is good enough to build a team around. I can see Manu getting injured as much if not more than McGrady if he gets the minutes and defensive attentions that Tmac faced on the court.

[Bigsmoke]

finley doesnt have 3 rings first of all. second of all hes never been the #1 option and carried his team to a gold medal a title or a championship

so...

Toni Kukoc > Dominique Wilkins ?

[WeaponX2024]

Manu might be a better perimeter defender than TMac but i do not think Manu is good enough to build a team around. I can see Manu getting injured as much if not more than McGrady if he gets the minutes and defensive attentions that Tmac faced on the court.
I'm not sure how Tmac is though.

[Bigsmoke]

I'm not sure how Tmac is though.

leading the Rockets to 51 wins his first season the team?

back to back scoring titles?

winning 12 games in the row without Yao?

[WeaponX2024]

leading the Rockets to 51 wins his first seasonon the team?

back to back scoring titles?

winning 12 games in the row without Yao?
and the post season success? lol. I know it's not entirely his fault, but I mean he could have at least got out of the 1st round once. We aren't asking him to win it all. I actually have to agree with bdreason though, Tmac's prime was better than Manu's, but Manu's total accomplishments just takes out Tracy.

[EricForman]

so...

Toni Kukoc > Dominique Wilkins ?


stop being a troll. those of us who said manu here mentioned many other things other than just rings.

you fools for always going to this logic is annoying as hell.

for example, ill say "duncan is better than KG, i mean come on, four rings!"

and then idiots/trolls would reply "oh yeah? so then Horry is better than Barkley? Fisher is better than Stockton?"

stop being idiots. you know everything isn't black and white. rings matter but of course you gotta look at it from perspective.

no one on here is saying Manu is better only because of rings.

[L.Kizzle]

no one on here is saying Manu is better only because of rings.
Basically they are.

Even with all the wining (winning is important) individual accomplishments count for something. I don't believe Manu has made ONE All-NBA team in his career.

[Bigsmoke]

stop being a troll. those of us who said manu here mentioned many other things other than just rings.

you fools for always going to this logic is annoying as hell.

for example, ill say "duncan is better than KG, i mean come on, four rings!"

and then idiots/trolls would reply "oh yeah? so then Horry is better than Barkley? Fisher is better than Stockton?"

stop being idiots. you know everything isn't black and white. rings matter but of course you gotta look at it from perspective.

no one on here is saying Manu is better only because of rings.

try reading spursdynasty420's latest post. Almost nobody in here have stated a thing why Manu is a better player than McGrady. They just drop all the negatives about McGrady.

[spree43]

I dont understand this "prime" arguement

Tmacs prime went for 7-8 years, at 26 pts, 6.5 rebs, 6 asts, playing 65-70 games a year

Ginobili's prime was 3-4 years of 17 pts, 4.5 rebs, 3 asts playing 65-70 games

So people are saying Tmac was better in his prime (which was longer than Ginibili's entire career) but overall Manu's career achievements overtake McGrady because he played on a better team

Dont attack me about numbers, they do mean something

but if you say watching Ginobili he looks like a better player than Tmac, then you didnt watch basketball in the last 10 years

McGrady is one of the most impressive offensive players ever, when he is on he is unstoppable

Ginobili looks good every second or third game and playing with Parker and Duncan makes up for it when he's off, as proven by the scoring log that I posted earlier

And suggesting his European career can be compared to McGrady's early years is really obsurd, its a different league, its like talking about a players NCAA record when discussing their career, Christian Laetner just jumped up 50 spots on his all time rankings

[bdreason]

Define career, what is a better career?


A career would be an accumulation of individual and team statistics. You would also have to include intangible things like reliability, leadership, and teamwork. How you balance all of the qualities is subjective of course.


For me, Basketball is a team sport first. I value playing a large role in winning 3 NBA championships and a Gold medal OVER winning Scoring Titles and making multiple NBA AS/All-NBA teams... but constantly losing and being ridiculed for it. As far as "careers" goes, it's not even close.

Now, that doesn't mean Manu was/is the better player. It just means he had a better professional career.

[spree43]

Basically they are.

Even with all the wining (winning is important) individual accomplishments count for something. I don't believe Manu has made ONE All-NBA team in his career.

I think he made the third team in 2008, but the point is still valid

The All Nba teams are voted on, not based on stats, but who is perceived as the best players in the league, its easy to talk up Ginobili when he just had a great game and Tmac is low right now

But Tmac, from memory so maybe not accurate, has 2 first team, 2-3 second team, and a couple of third team nominations

So that means he was thought to be top 5 two times, top 10 5 times and top 15 seven times in his career ... Ginobili broke into the top 15 once

Its pretty clear who's better

[L.Kizzle]

A career would be an accumulation of individual and team statistics. You would also have to include intangible things like reliability, leadership, and teamwork. How you balance all of the qualities is subjective of course.


For me, Basketball is a team sport first. I value playing a large role in winning 3 NBA championships and a Gold medal OVER winning Scoring Titles and making multiple NBA AS/All-NBA teams... but constantly losing and being ridiculed for it. As far as "careers" goes, it's not even close.

Now, that doesn't mean Manu was/is the better player. It just means he had a better professional career.
So guys like Tony Parker, Robert Horry, Michael Cooper, Danny Ainge, ect had better career's than McGrady?

[spree43]

A career would be an accumulation of individual and team statistics. You would also have to include intangible things like reliability, leadership, and teamwork. How you balance all of the qualities is subjective of course.


For me, Basketball is a team sport first. I value playing a large role in winning 3 NBA championships and a Gold medal OVER winning Scoring Titles and making multiple NBA AS/All-NBA teams... but constantly losing and being ridiculed for it. As far as "careers" goes, it's not even close.

Now, that doesn't mean Manu was/is the better player. It just means he had a better professional career.
Its a team sport, but we are comparing individuals, so team achievments are diminished in comparison to personal achievements

Would Tmac trade his career for Manu's? Maybe, maybe not, depends on his personal goals in life and his perspective

Was Tmac a better individual player than Manu? Definately yes

Are you argueing the second question?

[bdreason]

So guys like Tony Parker, Robert Horry, Michael Cooper, Danny Ainge, ect had better career's than McGrady?


I already explained that it's a combination of personal and team accolades, and well as other intangibles. How someone judges this is subjective, based on what they value more; individual accomplishments, or team accomplishments.


McGrady may have won more individual accolades, but he's going to forever be remembered as the "first round virgin". Personally, I'll take Manu's career, hands down... but it's subjective.


And McGrady is obviously the superior player, I already stated that in my first post.

[L.Kizzle]

In the 80s this would be like comparing Dominique Wilkins to Kelly Tripuka.

[mrpuente]

First off I dont appreciate you comparing Nique to some broke ass tmac.

[magnax1]

There are just some player people like to hate, because they got screwed over with the teams they had. Iverson, TMac, and a while ago Karl Malone (though he doesn't get hated to bad anymore) Ginobili wasn't close to TMac until 08.
Anyway
Ginobili IS the better player TMac was the better player career wise, and prime wise
Tmac is higher all time
I'd rather Have Ginobili in 2011
If you take Merchandise, and profitibilty into account, TMac is worth waaaaay more than Ginobili, though Ginobili is a really great player, and is one of the best supporting player ever, is not worth more in a contract than TMac. from 00-05, you could build a championship team around TMac, you could never do that with Ginobili.

[spursdynasty420]

There are just some player people like to hate, because they got screwed over with the teams they had. Iverson, TMac, and a while ago Karl Malone (though he doesn't get hated to bad anymore) Ginobili wasn't close to TMac until 08.
Anyway
Ginobili IS the better player TMac was the better player career wise, and prime wise
Tmac is higher all time
I'd rather Have Ginobili in 2011
If you take Merchandise, and profitibilty into account, TMac is worth waaaaay more than Ginobili, though Ginobili is a really great player, and is one of the best supporting player ever, is not worth more in a contract than TMac. from 00-05, you could build a championship team around TMac, you could never do that with Ginobili.

oh really??? you couldnt build a team around him?? how is that?? considering he was the #1 option on many runs for titles and gold medals

[DC Zephyrs]

try reading spursdynasty420's latest post. Almost nobody in here have stated a thing why Manu is a better player than McGrady. They just drop all the negatives about McGrady.

Ginobili was (and is) a better shooter, a better passer, and arguably a better defender. And those are just the tangible elements.

It's the intagibles where Manu really seperates himself as a player. Manu has the killer instinct and desire to win that TMac never had. He's been one of the best closers of the past decade, and has been a championship player at basically every level of basketball. Manu has accomplished a hell of a lot more than TMac has with significantly less individual talent. History will look back on Manu as a winner, and McGrady an underachiever.

And for the people saying Manu could never be as good a first option as McGrady, what exactly has McGrady done to be seen as a model franchise player? Win a few scoring titles? Never make it out of the first round? Lead his team to the worst record in the NBA in the prime of his career? I'm sorry, but I'm not convinced. If Manu had been drafted as a young 20 year old kid and allowed to develop in a starter's role like most NBA players, he would have been a premiere guard in the league. However that's just not how it played out. He was brought over in the middle of his professional career and into an established system where he was better suited as a 6th man. It shows a lot about his commitment to winning that he willingly accepted that role, as very few players with his ability would.

The topic isn't about who is the more gifted athlete or explosive scorer. It's about who is a better basketball player, and to me Manu Ginobili is clearly a better basketball player.

[magnax1]

oh really??? you couldnt build a team around him?? how is that?? considering he was the #1 option on many runs for titles and gold medals
He was the #1 option over Tim Duncan? What year? And international competition is different. Could you build a title winner around Pau? No. Could you win a Gold medal with him? Yes.

[spursdynasty420]

Ginobili was (and is) a better shooter, a better passer, and arguably a better defender. And those are just the tangible elements.

It's the intagibles where Manu really seperates himself as a player. Manu has the killer instinct and desire to win that TMac never had. He's been one of the best closers of the past decade, and has been a championship player at basically every level of basketball. Manu has accomplished a hell of a lot more than TMac has with significantly less individual talent. History will look back on Manu as a winner, and McGrady an underachiever.

And for the people saying Manu could never be as good a first option as McGrady, what exactly has McGrady done to be seen as a model franchise player? Win a few scoring titles? Never make it out of the first round? Lead his team to the worst record in the NBA in the prime of his career? I'm sorry, but I'm not convinced. If Manu had been drafted as a young 20 year old kid and allowed to develop in a starter's role like most NBA players, he would have been a premiere guard in the league. However that's just not how it played out. He was brought over in the middle of his professional career and into an established system where he was better suited as a 6th man. It shows a lot about his commitment to winning that he willingly accepted that role, as very few players with his ability would.

The topic isn't about who is the more gifted athlete or explosive scorer. It's about who is a better basketball player, and to me Manu Ginobili is clearly a better basketball player.

well said /thread

[godofgods]

Lol this is a joke. TMac is very good but Manu is the 2nd greatest SG of all time after Jordan. No comparison.

[Bigsmoke]

Ginobili was (and is) a better shooter, a better passer, and arguably a better defender. And those are just the tangible elements.

It's the intagibles where Manu really seperates himself as a player. Manu has the killer instinct and desire to win that TMac never had. He's been one of the best closers of the past decade, and has been a championship player at basically every level of basketball. Manu has accomplished a hell of a lot more than TMac has with significantly less individual talent. History will look back on Manu as a winner, and McGrady an underachiever.

And for the people saying Manu could never be as good a first option as McGrady, what exactly has McGrady done to be seen as a model franchise player? Win a few scoring titles? Never make it out of the first round? Lead his team to the worst record in the NBA in the prime of his career? I'm sorry, but I'm not convinced. If Manu had been drafted as a young 20 year old kid and allowed to develop in a starter's role like most NBA players, he would have been a premiere guard in the league. However that's just not how it played out. He was brought over in the middle of his professional career and into an established system where he was better suited as a 6th man. It shows a lot about his commitment to winning that he willingly accepted that role, as very few players with his ability would.

The topic isn't about who is the more gifted athlete or explosive scorer. It's about who is a better basketball player, and to me Manu Ginobili is clearly a better basketball player.


i stop reading after that. Manu is NOT a better passer than Tmac... are u kidding me? :hammerhead: McGrady was a better shooter too when i think about it

[DC Zephyrs]

i stop reading after that. Manu isnt a better passer:hammerhead:

By what, assists per game?

[HorryIsMyMVP]

Hard to chose between a chucker and a flopper. Both very unstoppable methods of play.

[Brunch@Five]

And Manu isn't even a better defender than TMac, where does that myth come from? TMac was among the best defenders in the NBA until he had to do everything on offense. On the Spurs, playing 30 minutes per game while not being asked to carry the load, he'd easily have been considered a premier defender this decade.

This thread reeks of homerism, and I'm not even a TMac fan at all. The comparison alone is absurd

[Anaximandro1]

How many titles would Duncan have won without Manu? 2 for sure.

Now...

How many rings would Manu have won without Duncan?

How many titles would Duncan&T-Mac have won?


:confusedshrug:

[SayTownRy]

McGrady was a better shooter too when i think about it

Career FG%, 3pt FG%, and FT% say otherwise. as i posted on the first page, mcgrady took 8 more shots per game than ginobili and scored only 7 more points per game (career-wise).

[Bigsmoke]

Career FG%, 3pt FG%, and FT% say otherwise. as i posted on the first page, mcgrady took 8 more shots per game than ginobili and scored only 7 more points per game (career-wise).

McGrady forced up a lot of shots. That is why his field goal% isnt too high. McGrady % would of been higher if he played for a team that has too much talent. But like i said earlier, Tmac faces more attention on defense. Manu had the opportunity of playing with the greatest PF to ever played the game and Parker. Those guys are the players that other coaches in the league are focusing when they have the ball.

[SayTownRy]

McGrady forced up a lot of shots. That is why his field goal% isnt too high. McGrady % would of been higher if he played for a team that has too much talent. But like i said earlier, Tmac faces more attention on defense. Manu had the opportunity of playing with the greatest PF to ever played the game and Parker. Those guys are the players that other coaches in the league are focusing when they have the ball.

well forcing up shots or not, he still was not a better shooter. speculation about what could have been aside, he hasn't shot over 44% since 2003. his last somewhat healthy season (66 games) he shot under 42% from the field and under 30% from 3... that was with yao in the post for 55 games.

and to think that coaches don't gameplan for ginobili is selling him short. most everyone knows that in the closing minutes of big games ginobili has the ball in his hands. he's a much better playmaker than parker and pop trusts him more in this role. it's easy to say because the spurs have tim duncan that ginobili never sees double teams or defensive pressure, but it's simply not true. he's always the focus of the other team's perimeter defense.

[WeaponX2024]

And Manu isn't even a better defender than TMac, where does that myth come from? TMac was among the best defenders in the NBA until he had to do everything on offense. On the Spurs, playing 30 minutes per game while not being asked to carry the load, he'd easily have been considered a premier defender this decade.

This thread reeks of homerism, and I'm not even a TMac fan at all. The comparison alone is absurd
Prime Tmac was a better defender, but throughout their careers I would say Manu was because of consistency. Because let's face it, Tmac has coasted on the defensive side of the ball and the rebounding side of the ball for a while now, like since the 2004 season. Ginobili usually puts in a huge effort getting those rebounds and shutting down players, now he may not be Bruce Bowen shut down but he certainly plays like he wants to shut'em down.

[spree43]

This is what I dont understand, if Tmac was a better defender than Ginobili until 2004, thats what 6 years of his career

Ginobili is coming into his 7th season (a couple unproductive), yet his overall career production makes him better?

And the theory behind a player like Tmac shooting worse isnt that he is a chucker

If Tmac comes out shooting bad he has to keep shooting, because if he doesnt then Pat Garrity or Darrell Armstrong has to

If Ginobili comes out shooting bad he stops shooting, they go to Duncan and Parker and Manu can pick his spots, that is why he only averaged 16 ppg, he would score 25 one game and then 5 the next, but in those situations Tmac would keep shooting and work his way up to 20 points

This is why they cant even be compared, Tmac was a superstar, Ginobili a great complimentary player ... its almost like comparing a point guard to a center, they are expected to do different things, so you cant compare them

But one thing is for sure, you know the superstar is better, any arguement of what Manu could have done as a first option is hyperthetical and has no backing

[SayTownRy]

But one thing is for sure, you know the superstar is better, any arguement of what Manu could have done as a first option is hyperthetical and has no backing

except for the countless times manu stepped up when duncan or parker was out. (re: 2008)

oh and the 04 and 08 olympics. the latter of which he was leading in ppg before he went down.

oh and for much of the 05 postseason.

[spree43]

except for the countless times manu stepped up when duncan or parker was out. (re: 2008)

oh and the 04 and 08 olympics. the latter of which he was leading in ppg before he went down.

oh and for much of the 05 postseason.
What in 08 when Duncan played 78 games?

Or in 2005 when he was their 3rd leading scorer on the team in the regular season and when Duncan averaged 24 and 12 in the playoffs?

My whole point is that he is the best player on occasion, and he can afford to be because Duncan carries them most of the time, Tmac is a full time superstar ... big difference

And I'm not talking about international ball, because it has no relevance, it is played entirely differently, and if you dont know that you are mostly likely either very unexperienced in watching it, under the age of 18, never played competitve basketball in your life or not the smartest cookie in the jar

[gasolina]

Manu is an excellent 2nd option for a team. Mcgrady, even at his prime, was a mediocre one. Sure he could score, but he couldn't take his team anywhere.

That said, I'd rather have Manu on my team, provided I have a great 1st option, like prime Shaq.

[SayTownRy]

What in 08 when Duncan played 78 games?

Or in 2005 when he was their 3rd leading scorer on the team in the regular season and when Duncan averaged 24 and 12 in the playoffs?

My whole point is that he is the best player on occasion, and he can afford to be because Duncan carries them most of the time, Tmac is a full time superstar ... big difference

And I'm not talking about international ball, because it has no relevance, it is played entirely differently, and if you dont know that you are mostly likely either very unexperienced in watching it, under the age of 18, never played competitve basketball in your life or not the smartest cookie in the jar

this whole international ball has no relevance is just asinine. it doesn't serve your argument so you just discredit it altogether. you make it sound like it's a different sport. fact is it's basketball and manu lead a team to the gold medal in a competitive tournament against nba legends. that is worth being in the discussion, whether i played "competive basketball" or not. :oldlol:

"well mcgrady never played in the olympics so manu leading a team of scola, delfino, and nocioni, over a team of duncan, ai, bron, wade, and every other nba star of 2004 has no relevance..."

the fact that international ball has gotten more competitive and the fact that countries like spain and argentina have caught up to the US because of players like manu ginobili furthers euroball's relevance imo. guess i'm 18.

[spree43]

this whole international ball has no relevance is just asinine. it doesn't serve your argument so you just discredit it altogether. you make it sound like it's a different sport. fact is it's basketball and manu lead a team to the gold medal in a competitive tournament against nba legends. that is worth being in the discussion, whether i played "competive basketball" or not. :oldlol:

"well mcgrady never played in the olympics so manu leading a team of scola, delfino, and nocioni, over a team of duncan, ai, bron, wade, and every other nba star of 2004 has no relevance..."

the fact that international ball has gotten more competitive and the fact that countries like spain and argentina have caught up to the US because of players like manu ginobili furthers euroball's relevance imo. guess i'm 18.

Do I need to bring up Carlos Arroyo?

He beat the US as the main option

How about I talk about Andrew Gaze ... he averaged 21 points, 5 rebs, 6 assists, 2 stls over 4 Olympics, they played in the bronze medal games a couple of times ... 31 ppg, 8 assists, 5 rebs in the Australian National League ... won multiple championships in that league (from which Stephan Jackson was dropped a year before playing in the NBA) ... he won an NBA championship ... lead Seton Hall to the NCAA final

His NBA averages? ... 1.7 points per game

His play was shown up playing and training against ultra athletic players every night, its a different level

Now thats all basketball isnt it, its an extreme example, but it proves my point that if its not the NBA it doesnt mean as much

[spursdynasty420]

if the basketball hall of fame considers olympic accomplishments why cant these ISH NERDS? oh ya.. too many superstar nut huggers on here that dont watch the spurs. just like to see mcgrady chucking all night...


and LOL to any idiot who says mcgrady was a better defender or even passer ROFL

[Bigsmoke]

except for the countless times manu stepped up when duncan or parker was out. (re: 2008)

oh and the 04 and 08 olympics. the latter of which he was leading in ppg before he went down.

oh and for much of the 05 postseason.

why people keep bringing up olympics bull****? TMAC IS A BETTER "NBA" PLAYER. get it straight.

[Bigsmoke]

if the basketball hall of fame considers olympic accomplishments why cant these ISH NERDS? oh ya.. too many superstar nut huggers on here that dont watch the spurs. just like to see mcgrady chucking all night...


and LOL to any idiot who says mcgrady was a better defender or even passer ROFL


LMAO @ Spurs fans putting a 6-mans over superstars

[spree43]

if the basketball hall of fame considers olympic accomplishments why cant these ISH NERDS? oh ya.. too many superstar nut huggers on here that dont watch the spurs. just like to see mcgrady chucking all night...


and LOL to any idiot who says mcgrady was a better defender or even passer ROFL

The arguement is that Manu could be a 1st option in the NBA, because he averaged 20 points, 2 rebs, 4 assists over 6 games against Lithuania, Australia, Croatia, Iran, Russia and Greece, then only played 6 minutes against the US and got 2 points and didnt play in the bronze medal game

I just looked that up, and I was a little disapointed, you were all talking his tournament up like he was averaging 30 or something ... Jeez that arguement kind of falls through doesnt it, makes me think one person mentioned it and the rest ran with it without knowledge to back it up

Thats supposed to make up for only averaging 16 point in the NBA, averaging 20 against teams that have 1-2 NBA role players of their teams ... wow, maybe I should take it all back!

[Allstar24]

1) Who do you think was/is the better player?

T-mac

2) Who had the better career?

Can't answer that yet.

3) Who was the greater player in your opinion on an all-time list?

T-mac (duh!)

4) Who would you rather have in the 2010-2011 season?

If they're both healthy, T-mac.

5) Who was more worth it to get the contract he got with everything (fans, income made to team, merchandise, etc.) considered?

T-mac
Ginobili unfortunately doesn't have it in him to be the main man but he'll always be a great second fiddle.

[Bigsmoke]

when i think about it why are people on Manu's d*ck so hard right now anyway? he's not even playing that well so far this season.

12.9ppg 41% shooting

yea he's currently a top 3 SG in the NBA:oldlol:

[L.Kizzle]

when i think about it why are people on Manu's d*ck so hard right now anyway? he's not even playing that well so far this season.

12.9ppg 41% shooting

yea he's currently a top 3 SG in the NBA:oldlol:
But ... he won three titles, lol.

[SCdac]

The arguement is that Manu could be a 1st option in the NBA, because he averaged 20 points, 2 rebs, 4 assists over 6 games against Lithuania, Australia, Croatia, Iran, Russia and Greece, then only played 6 minutes against the US and got 2 points and didnt play in the bronze medal game

I just looked that up, and I was a little disapointed, you were all talking his tournament up like he was averaging 30 or something ... Jeez that arguement kind of falls through doesnt it, makes me think one person mentioned it and the rest ran with it without knowledge to back it up

Thats supposed to make up for only averaging 16 point in the NBA, averaging 20 against teams that have 1-2 NBA role players of their teams ... wow, maybe I should take it all back!

Did you watch his 2004 Olympic performance? :confusedshrug:

[DC Zephyrs]

when i think about it why are people on Manu's d*ck so hard right now anyway? he's not even playing that well so far this season.

12.9ppg 41% shooting

yea he's currently a top 3 SG in the NBA:oldlol:

Playing that card doesn't work considering TMac is currently healthy and sitting at home because he can't even find minutes on a team of above average role players.

[spree43]

Did you watch his 2004 Olympic performance? :confusedshrug:
I saw two argentina games, I think, maybe 3 I cant remember, I didnt see him drop 32 on Iran, but in general it seemed like they were playing a team game, rather than having an NBA style 1st option

Ive seen him dominate a 6 game stretch in the NBA, but seen Tmac dominate for 7 seasons

I think my point is made that you cant use a 6 game tournament against sub-par teams to claim Ginobili to be a potential 1st option in the NBA

Go back and look at some of the comments made before I posted his Olympic stats, some are rediculously uninformed

[robertshaw_1]

stupid thread....
ginobili is way better than that jumpshooter guy.....

are we talking about basketball here? or about a shooting contest?

by the way, manu has better shooting %....

IMO.

[SayTownRy]

Carlos Arroyo, Andrew Gaze

if you would, post about these guys when they lead their country's team to a gold medal over a stacked team USA loaded with hall of famers. i'll be waiting.


why people keep bringing up olympics bull****? TMAC IS A BETTER "NBA" PLAYER. get it straight.

because it absolutely has it's place in the discussion. beating team usa to win the gold matters. how you guys can just completely omit that from a player's resume is beyond me.

and if you had the wherewithal to read the thread title and the original post you'd see that this thread is about being a better player in general - not necessarily just nba. it's perfectly applicable to include manu's entire resume in the discussion, not just age 25 and after which helps your argument.

[SCdac]

I saw two argentina games, I think, maybe 3 I cant remember, I didnt see him drop 32 on Iran, but in general it seemed like they were playing a team game, rather than having an NBA style 1st option

Ive seen him dominate a 6 game stretch in the NBA, but seen Tmac dominate for 7 seasons

I think my point is made that you cant use a 6 game tournament against sub-par teams to claim Ginobili to be a potential 1st option in the NBA

Go back and look at some of the comments made before I posted his Olympic stats, some are rediculously uninformed

He was the best player on his team, named MVP of the tournament, and hit some crazy clutch shots to boot (serbia and montenegro)... Is it the NBA, no. Should it be disregarded? Certainly not. It's still bouncing a ball, playing defense, shooting baskets, using sets, etc... It's still basketball - hell it's the Olympics.... I don't see anyone ever downplaying our US team's accomplishments.

I personally think McGrady (in his prime) was a tier (or two) above Manu as only a scorer, but his passing skills are about equal with Manu (T-Mac sort of the point-forward type and great at it), but Manu is a better defender, better at picking off steals, a more efficient, heady, and clutch player. Check Manu's "clutch" stats that only count from close games at the end of the 4th - he's absolutely one of the best in terms of being an efficient and reliable baller.

It's hard to compare the two accurately in my opinion. Their roles have been SO different... And you can't blame Manu for it. He came into the league, turned heads, and made a direct impact as a rookie... but it's not like he could ever surpass Tim Duncan as the leader of the Spurs, nor was he asked to/given the chance to/expected to.

The biggest career differences to me, that make it difficult to compare the two.

McGrady: 35 MPG, 18.3 FGA per game (24 FGA per game in 03 :eek: )
Ginobili: 28 MPG, 10.3 FGA per game (13 FGA per game in 08)

We're talking about Tracy's 14,000+ shots compared to Manu's 5000+.... That's a huge difference... Give Manu that many shots as the best player on a team, and I guarantee he's averaging 20 points per game or over. It took McGrady 19.8 shot attempts to average 21.6 PPG in 08, while it took Manu only 13.3 attempts to average 19.5 PPG (off the bench, in less minutes, lead the Spurs in scoring)... That kind of IMPACT speaks for itself.

Alot of the times I get the feeling that people on this board think Manu literally plays every minute of basketball alongside Tim Duncan. It's simply not true. He comes off the bench for a reason - to be the offensive leader of the second unit and the spark off the bench. When he got that near triple double two days ago, Duncan was riding the bench for at least half of it (I was at the game, TD was benched when it became a blowout). Manu was creating on his own - nothing new at all. His court vision is probably top-5 amongst shooting guards.

And it's not like Manu has never dropped big games... A little over a year ago he dropped 46 points with 8 assists/3 steals on Lebrons Cavs (outscoring Lebron), then 8 days later he drops 44 points on the timberwolves knocking down 7 0f 9 three's. Obviously he's not going to average that (and he's had many many other big games).... But the point is Manu absolutely has the talent to be in the argument in with McGrady.

[spursdynasty420]

Im still waiting to hear these jokers explain why mcgrady is a better defender and passer. both are very untrue.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Im still waiting to hear these jokers explain why mcgrady is a better defender and passer. both are very untrue.

Explain why Manu is a better passer. Atleast McGrady has the numbers to back up his case.

Here are some great passes by McGrady

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wl7fpE3G7Rk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rfazfxrP6o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXZ66k-HOJI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iT1cVI007w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BHZmYBKGyA

You can't really back up who is the better passer aside from numbers, here are the numbers even though they don't tell the whole story.

T-Mac

2001-2002 25.6 ppg, 5.3 apg, 2.5 TO
2002-2003 32.1 ppg, 5.5 apg, 2.6 TO
2003-2004 28.0 ppg, 5.5 apg, 2.7 TO
2004-2005 25.7 ppg, 5.7 apg, 2.6 TO
2006-2007 24.6 ppg, 6.5 apg, 3.0 TO
2007-2008 21.6 ppg, 5.9 apg, 2.4 TO

Manu

2003-2004 12.8 ppg, 3.8 apg, 2.1 TO
2004-2005 16.0 ppg, 3.9 apg, 2.3 TO
2005-2006 15.1 ppg, 3.6 apg, 1.9 TO
2006-2007 16.5 ppg, 3.5 apg, 2.1 TO
2007-2008 19.5 ppg, 4.5 apg, 2.7 TO

As you can see by 2008 despite carrying a lighter load, Ginobili was already averaging more turnovers than McGrady despite averaging less ppg and apg. I'm not saying this is proof, but it's better than anything you can come up with.

[SCdac]

Numbers don't take into account how much more McGrady has/had the ball in his hands... and you conveniently left out the amount of minutes they play.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Numbers don't take into account how much more McGrady has/had the ball in his hands... and you conveniently left out the amount of minutes they play.

And as the minutes rise so will the turnovers. Manu never had more than 5.2 assists per 36 minutes for a full season and that season he did have 3.1 TO and 22.6 points per 36 minutes. And the fact that McGrady had the ball in his hands that much and still wasn't turnover prone should show that he mostly threw good passes.

And the FGA isn't a good argument. Very few players can put up that many shots and be productive on a winning team. McGrady was one of the few. And McGrady's efficiency on that type of volume in 2003 should show what a good shooter he was.

[SCdac]

Career assist averages Per-36:

McGrady: 4.9
Ginobili: 4.7

hardly a huge difference between the two.

Manu's per-36 assist numbers right now (5.9) are about on on par with McGrady's last two seasons... Not bad considering he's playing with Tony Parker and Tim Duncan (who's a great passer too).

[ShaqAttack3234]

Career assist averages Per-36:

McGrady: 4.9
Ginobili: 4.7

hardly a huge difference between the two.

Manu's per-36 assist numbers right now (5.9) are about on on par with McGrady's last two seasons... Not bad considering he's playing with Tony Parker and Tim Duncan (who's a great passer too).

Yes, but at best that puts him just about on par with McGrady, not really though when you consider how much of a scoring load T-Mac had to carry in those seasons. I'm still not seeing where this "Manu is a better passer" stuff comes from.

[SCdac]

Yes, but at best that puts him just about on par with McGrady, not really though when you consider how much of a scoring load T-Mac had to carry in those seasons. I'm still not seeing where this "Manu is a better passer" stuff comes from.

I personally never argued that, I said they are about equal in passing skills (see post #130). But I do understand the sentiments for both sides. Some of Manu's passes can only be described as "amazing" even by the casual NBA fan. You don't notch 10 assists (last game) as the backup SG unless you're a very skilled playmaker. The fact that he's left handed and has an unorthodox style helps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGyLprUDctY (last game - near trip dub)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYkFlrW_cqs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97EzOdPOUNw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gRbv8L8coE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg3woEUHJFY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrIMwGbPjbg&feature=fvw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fZy9mnpze0&feature=related

just a handful, if you haven't watched him in awhile.

[L.Kizzle]

Who's better, Mitch Richmond or Vinnie Del Negro.

[Bigsmoke]

Manu VS Tmac is like Toni Kukoc VS Grant Hill

[spursdynasty420]

manu can be a shut down defender at time. mcgrady? not so much

[mrpuente]

this is like comparing my swag, vs your swag....doesnt really make any sense but if feels like im winning when I say it.

[EricForman]

Who's better, Mitch Richmond or Vinnie Del Negro.


if Vinnie Del Negro had led a team to beat a team of NBA all stars in the Olympics, then yes.

tmac's a better individual player, no doubt, but in the context of an NBA game, this isn't as absurd an argument as you make it out to be. it's like arguing Nash vs Iverson. Iverson would destroy Nash in any one on one game, but--and I'm sure an equal amount of Iverson homers on ISH will disagree, Nash as a team player sh*ts on Iverson and can lead teams to more wins than Iverson could 99 times out of 100.

[spree43]

if Vinnie Del Negro had led a team to beat a team of NBA all stars in the Olympics, then yes.

tmac's a better individual player, no doubt, but in the context of an NBA game, this isn't as absurd an argument as you make it out to be. it's like arguing Nash vs Iverson. Iverson would destroy Nash in any one on one game, but--and I'm sure an equal amount of Iverson homers on ISH will disagree, Nash as a team player sh*ts on Iverson and can lead teams to more wins than Iverson could 99 times out of 100.

In 2008 he played 6 minutes against the USA

In 2004 he played one game against the USA and got 29 points ... one game against NBA talent makes up for McGradys dominance over a course of hundreds of games

By the way team USA's leading scorer that game was Stephan Marbury, and Puerto Rico beat them by 19 points in that tournament, behind 24 and 7 from Carlos Arroyo

Its a 7 game tournament, it holds as much weight as a couple of weeks in the NBA, maybe less, because very few of the games are against NBA talent

We all know Manu can dominate stretches, so this olympic thing doesnt help

The point is that you cant show me that he can carry a team for a season against NBA level talent, not a 5 games stretch, a season

And if you say he can its just a hyperthethical and has no value at all

Its a different thing to lead a team to the playoffs when your second best player is a rookie Mike Miller, or Darrell Armstrong, than it is to be the third or second option and only have to occasionally stand up

They cant even be compared, Tmacs career is at the superstar level, Ginobili is maybe one of the best 6th men/complimentary players ever, but he's no superstar

[spursdynasty420]

In 2008 he played 6 minutes against the USA

In 2004 he played one game against the USA and got 29 points ... one game against NBA talent makes up for McGradys dominance over a course of hundreds of games

By the way team USA's leading scorer that game was Stephan Marbury, and Puerto Rico beat them by 19 points in that tournament, behind 24 and 7 from Carlos Arroyo

Its a 7 game tournament, it holds as much weight as a couple of weeks in the NBA, maybe less, because very few of the games is againt NBA talent

We all know Manu can dominate stretches, so this olympic thing doesnt help

The point is that you cant show me that he can carry a team for a season against NBA level talent, not a 5 games stretch, a season

And if you say he can its just a hyperthethical and has no value at all

i say he can you say he cant. neither of us are gonna be proven right until he gets his own team. which wont happen. hes not leaving SA

[brantonli]

manu can be a shut down defender at time. mcgrady? not so much

McGrady can be a shut down defender at times. It's just that it hasn't happened for about 4 years.

[spree43]

i say he can you say he cant. neither of us are gonna be proven right until he gets his own team. which wont happen. hes not leaving SA
McGrady has, Ginobili hasnt, therefore I'm not dealing in hypertheticals, so I have some backing to my arguement

I'm not just making stuff up

[brantonli]

I never knew that Manu was that great of a passer, but I can say for sure that McGrady's playmaking skills is one of his far more underrated skills. Especially when McGrady got slower these past few hears, he's shown his passing skills more and more, problem was before Scola and Landry got here he was passing to Chuck Hayes and Juwan Howard. But even if you just watch those 7 or 8 minutes he's played in 6 games this season, you can see his passing is still there and hasn't regressed a single bit.

[EricForman]

They cant even be compared, Tmacs career is at the superstar level, Ginobili is maybe one of the best 6th men/complimentary players ever, but he's no superstar


i dont agree. i think tmac is at the absolute bottom rung of "superstar" level while Manu is at the top of the "star" level... meaning they're quite close.

[ShaqAttack3234]

tmac's a better individual player, no doubt, but in the context of an NBA game, this isn't as absurd an argument as you make it out to be. it's like arguing Nash vs Iverson. Iverson would destroy Nash in any one on one game, but--and I'm sure an equal amount of Iverson homers on ISH will disagree, Nash as a team player sh*ts on Iverson and can lead teams to more wins than Iverson could 99 times out of 100.

Except Nash was a franchise player in his own right and the leader of his team so how is that comparison relevant? Atleast Nash and Iverson were both superstars with their own deal of individual success.

[spursdynasty420]

manu in 24 minutes tonight in a win vs the heat he had

18 points 4 steals 4 boards 4 assists on 7-13.. in 24 MINUTES

[SCdac]

McGrady has, Ginobili hasnt, therefore I'm not dealing in hypertheticals, so I have some backing to my arguement

I'm not just making stuff up

The only argument you've made is that basically everything Ginobili has done in his basketball career is negligible, and everything McGrady has done in his career is applicable. Kind of a bleak attempt at trying to accurately compare the two, but whatever, I'm not going to beat it to death.... and it's hypotheticals.

29 points, and a win, against this 2004 USA roster (below) isn't insignificant entirely if we're honestly talking basketball evaluation, just like T-Macs miraculous 13 points in 35 seconds isn't insignificant even though their both just single games. It may not have been finely tuned, but that's pretty much an all-star team lead by Larry Brown.

Tim Duncan
Amare Stoudemire
Carlos Boozer
Emeka Okafor
Lebron James
Carmelo Anthony
Dwayne Wade
Stephon Marbury
Richard Jefferson
Allen Iverson
Shawn Marion
Lamar Odom

I know much of the game can be seen on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sb2lbltJvsQ
That Argentinian team is excellent, but nobody on that squad outside Manu is making an NBA AS game or All-NBA team ... Manu's penetration, three point shooting, and overall craftiness is up there with the best of 'em both then and now.

[spursdynasty420]

ginobili just out played dwayne wade tonight. manu is a top 3 SG STILL

[ShaqAttack3234]

ginobili just out played dwayne wade tonight. manu is a top 3 SG STILL

Nope. Kobe, Wade, Vince Carter, Joe Johnson and Brandon Roy have all been better this year to name a few.

[Lord Landry]

Ginobili is better than the heartless, back stabbing losers McGrady-Carter cousins.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Ginobili is better than the heartless, back stabbing losers McGrady-Carter cousins.

:roll:

[Lord Landry]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuqD9XiMNv0

[L.Kizzle]

Wired, is Manu is supposedly better why haven't the coaches voted him on NBA teams and All-Star teams?

[Lord Landry]

Wired, is Manu is supposedly better why haven't the coaches voted him on NBA teams and All-Star teams?
All-Star teams? Tell Tmac to thank China. All-NBA teams? How about All-Playoff teams?

[spree43]

The only argument you've made is that basically everything Ginobili has done in his basketball career is negligible, and everything McGrady has done in his career is applicable. Kind of a bleak attempt at trying to accurately compare the two, but whatever, I'm not going to beat it to death.... and it's hypotheticals.

29 points, and a win, against this 2004 USA roster (below) isn't insignificant entirely if we're honestly talking basketball evaluation, just like T-Macs miraculous 13 points in 35 seconds isn't insignificant even though their both just single games. It may not have been finely tuned, but that's pretty much an all-star team lead by Larry Brown.

Tim Duncan
Amare Stoudemire
Carlos Boozer
Emeka Okafor
Lebron James
Carmelo Anthony
Dwayne Wade
Stephon Marbury
Richard Jefferson
Allen Iverson
Shawn Marion
Lamar Odom

I know much of the game can be seen on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sb2lbltJvsQ
That Argentinian team is excellent, but nobody on that squad outside Manu is making an NBA AS game or All-NBA team ... Manu's penetration, three point shooting, and overall craftiness is up there with the best of 'em both then and now.
I'm not saying the gold medal is insignificant in terms of a career achievement

I'm saying the olympic tournament cant be used as an example of how Manu is capable of carrying an NBA team for a season

That is what was suggested a couple of pages ago, that the 2004 and 2008 olympics were examples of Manu carrying a team as a first option, the others were the 2005 playoffs and the 2008 season, both of which he was a second option

Sure he had good games, where he outscored Duncan even, but its not the same as puting up those numbers everynight when the oposition knows you're trying to, and there is nobody else on your team capable of it

The Olympics were 6-8 games long, and he was playing non NBA talent for all but 1 of those games, it doesnt prove he can carry a team against NBA talent

[spursdynasty420]

Nope. Kobe, Wade, Vince Carter, Joe Johnson and Brandon Roy have all been better this year to name a few.

kobe and wade are above ginobili even tho ginobili out played wade tonight.

1. kobe
2. wade
3. ginobili
4. jj
5. roy(even though he has been underachieving ALL YEAR i dont know why you kids are talkin this guy up)

[ShaqAttack3234]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuqD9XiMNv0

What exactly does a bunch of butt hurt Raptor fans have to do with who the better player is? :oldlol:


kobe and wade are above ginobili even tho ginobili out played wade tonight.

1. kobe
2. wade
3. ginobili
4. jj
5. roy(even though he has been underachieving ALL YEAR i dont know why you kids are talkin this guy up)

Pathetic. :oldlol: Ginobili finally shows up for a few games this year and he's better than JJ, Roy and VC?

[L.Kizzle]

All-Star teams? Tell Tmac to thank China. All-NBA teams? How about All-Playoff teams?
Macs been making All-Star before we even knew Yao Ming existed, next. All-Playoff team, is that a new team, Manu's not there?

[spree43]

BTW, the 6th man should put up better per minute numbers ... he's playing against the opositions bench for most of his playing time

You cant compare a 6th man to a superstar starter, its rediculous

I'm not argueing whether Manu is a great player, but his carer is no comparison to Tmacs

Tmacs accomplishments as a player are miles ahead of what Ginobili has done, sure ginobili has team accomplishments, but what does that really mean when you are the second/third option?

It means you were playing on a better team

Ginobilis team accomplishments as a first option or best player = nothing

Now if Ginobili had great individual accomplishments that would be a different story, if he had all nba teams nominations and allstar appearances you could say, he was a superstar playing behind another superstar, but he doesnt

He was a great complimentary player to Tim Duncan, any talk to the contrary is just speculation

[L.Kizzle]

BTW, the 6th man should put up better per minute numbers ... he's playing against the opositions bench for most of his playing time

You cant compare a 6th man to a superstar starter, its rediculous

I'm not argueing whether Manu is a great player, but his carer is no comparison to Tmacs

Tmacs accomplishments as a player are miles ahead of what Ginobili has done, sure ginobili has team accomplishments, but what does that really mean when you are the second/third option?

It means you were playing on a better team

Ginobilis team accomplishments as a first option or best player = nothing

Now if Ginobili had great individual accomplishments that would be a different story, if he had all nba teams nominations and allstar appearances you could say, he was a superstar playing behind another superstar, but he doesnt

He was a great complimentary player to Tim Duncan, any talk to the contrary is just speculation
They are blind. Manu is not Sam Jones or Robert Parish or James Worhty who have multiple All-Star appearances and All-NBA appearances to back up their claim when comparing them to Dominique and others in their era.

[spursdynasty420]

BTW, the 6th man should put up better per minute numbers ... he's playing against the opositions bench for most of his playing time

You cant compare a 6th man to a superstar starter, its rediculous

I'm not argueing whether Manu is a great player, but his carer is no comparison to Tmacs

Tmacs accomplishments as a player are miles ahead of what Ginobili has done, sure ginobili has team accomplishments, but what does that really mean when you are the second/third option?

It means you were playing on a better team

Ginobilis team accomplishments as a first option or best player = nothing

Now if Ginobili had great individual accomplishments that would be a different story, if he had all nba teams nominations and allstar appearances you could say, he was a superstar playing behind another superstar, but he doesnt

He was a great complimentary player to Tim Duncan, any talk to the contrary is just speculation

yah you are a moron. it doesnt matter who starts in pops system. it matters who finishes. manu is our finisher moron. watch more spurs games. you can really tell the people who watch spurs games to the retards who dont like this kid. I cant argue with anyone who thinks manu is a 6th man

[spree43]

yah you are a moron. it doesnt matter who starts in pops system. it matters who finishes. manu is our finisher moron. watch more spurs games. you can really tell the people who watch spurs games to the retards who dont like this kid. I cant argue with anyone who thinks manu is a 6th man
Firstly, I love Ginobili as a player

But what do you have to say about the later part of that post?

Why has Ginobili got little personal accolades? Why has Tmac been considerred to be a top 5 player in the league twice, and Ginobili made the third team once in his career?

How can you argue that a 1 time allstar, 1 time 3rd team is better than a ;

- 2 time 1st team
- 3 time second team
- 2 time third team
- 7 time allstar
- 11th among current players in MVP shares
- top 10 in MVP voting 6 times

Answer ... you are a spurs homer, and it is extremely obvious, even moreso by that fact that everytime a bring up a good point you start calling me childish little names ... so you think I'm a moron, thats nice, I dont really care

[spursdynasty420]

Firstly, I love Ginobili as a player

But what do you have to say about the later part of that post?

Why has Ginobili got little personal accolades? Why has Tmac been considerred to be a top 5 player in the league twice, and Ginobili made the third team once in his career?

How can you argue that a 1 time allstar, 1 time 3rd team is better than a ;

- 2 time 1st team
- 3 time second team
- 2 time third team
- 7 time allstar
- 11th among current players in MVP shares
- top 10 in MVP voting 6 times

Answer ... you are a spurs homer, and it is extremely obvious, even moreso by that fact that everytime a bring up a good point you start calling me childish little names ... so you think I'm a moron, thats nice, I dont really care

you base everything on personal accolades. thats why im done talking to you

[Rekindled]

Firstly, I love Ginobili as a player

But what do you have to say about the later part of that post?

Why has Ginobili got little personal accolades? Why has Tmac been considerred to be a top 5 player in the league twice, and Ginobili made the third team once in his career?

How can you argue that a 1 time allstar, 1 time 3rd team is better than a ;

- 2 time 1st team
- 3 time second team
- 2 time third team
- 7 time allstar
- 11th among current players in MVP shares
- top 10 in MVP voting 6 times

Answer ... you are a spurs homer, and it is extremely obvious, even moreso by that fact that everytime a bring up a good point you start calling me childish little names ... so you think I'm a moron, thats nice, I dont really care

wow you might just be the dumbest person to ever post on ISH

Manu Ginobili is the only player EVER to win an olympic gold medal, euroleague championship and nba championship. 2004 olympic tournament MVP, 2 time euroleague mvp, italian league mvp. McGrady hasnt won ****.

[Brunch@Five]

:oldlol: at the display of homerism in this thread

Manu is a shut down defender now, too?

[spree43]

wow you might just be the dumbest person to ever post on ISH

Manu Ginobili is the only player EVER to win an olympic gold medal, euroleague championship and nba championship. 2004 olympic tournament MVP, 2 time euroleague mvp, italian league mvp. McGrady hasnt won ****.
I'm dumb?
Think about what you just said

the only player ever to win an olympic gold medal and euroleague championship and nba championship

Think about that ... team USA wins every olympic gold medal and all their players are too good to play in European leagues, the one year that they were off Argentina won, so its a pretty specific criteria that you have just put forward

So he won the MVP of a 8 game tournament with one team that has more than 3-4 NBA players, and he won some MVP awards in Europe in a lower standard league

If he was in the top 3 shooting guards of the decade he would have won some NBA accolades, do you agree?

He was voted the 3rd best shooting guard in 2008, Tmac was voted the best in his position twice, second best 3 times and third best twice

You cant ignore that, its not about stats, he was voted

So Tmac wins in terms of stats, he wins in terms of personal NBA achievements and he wins based on the opinions of NBA experts at the time

Yet I am dumb for agreeing with all these aspects, and not agreeing with your opinion

[SayTownRy]

I'm saying the olympic tournament cant be used as an example of how Manu is capable of carrying an NBA team for a season

That is what was suggested a couple of pages ago, that the 2004 and 2008 olympics were examples of Manu carrying a team as a first option, the others were the 2005 playoffs and the 2008 season, both of which he was a second option

Sure he had good games, where he outscored Duncan even, but its not the same as puting up those numbers everynight when the oposition knows you're trying to, and there is nobody else on your team capable of it

so manu leading the olympic team, twice, as the first option is not an example of manu leading a team as a first option? (the question was first option on a basketball team, not necessarily nba team) he either put a team on his back and won or he didn't... that's what was said.

he tore it up in both 04 and 08 as the first option. guess we'll have to wait for him to drag his old ass out there in 2012 to see it again...

and manu outscored duncan on the season in 2008. he did put up those numbers every night. and coincidentally enough the opposition knew it too.

and when you play with a GOAT PF you're not gonna be the first option all the time. but there were absolutely stretches in the 05 postseason where manu was the first option. he sliced up that pistons defense like a certain other shooting guard was unable to do the year before (also playing with an all time great big man) and closely rivaled a top 10 all time player for finals mvp. that's atleast worth comparing to leading a team to pretty dismal 42-40 or 46-36 records.


So he won the MVP of a 8 game tournament with one team that has more than 3-4 NBA players

let's not pretend the nba players on that argentinian national team were anything special at the time. 04 scola, nocioni, delfino, hermann, oberto? the closest thing to the worst player on the USA roster is scola and he wasn't the player then that he is now. manu was a one man wrecking crew that game if you saw it and you know he was the focus of the 08 team's defense before he went down because the USA team understood that manu was a viable first option because he lit them up just 4 years prior. he was the tournament's highest scorer after dominating it the last chance he got.


BTW, the 6th man should put up better per minute numbers ... he's playing against the opositions bench for most of his playing time

You cant compare a 6th man to a superstar starter, its rediculous

Ginobilis team accomplishments as a first option or best player = nothing

you lose a lot of credibility when you say ginobili is just some 6th man. he plays starters minutes, closes out games, and has easily been the 2nd or 3rd best player for the spurs pretty much since he joined the team. him coming off the bench is a strategy pop employs. he's been essentially the entire bench and our closer for years.

also ginobili's per minute numbers are pretty stout. they eat mcgrady's alive in virtually every statistical category. he always plays big 4th quarter minutes too against the opposing team's strongest line up. what ginobili does per minute on both ends of the court is not something you really wanna bring up in this thread. he's as efficient as they come whether he starts, comes off the bench, or closes the game out.

[spree43]

so manu leading the olympic team, twice, as the first option is not an example of manu leading a team as a first option? (the question was first option on a basketball team, not necessarily nba team) he either put a team on his back and won or he didn't... that's what was said.

he tore it up in both 04 and 08 as the first option. guess we'll have to wait for him to drag his old ass out there in 2012 to see it again...


He lead a team for 8 games, that is my point. You cant say that because he lead a team for 8 games, when only one team had the statndard of athletes that are seen every night in the NBA on it, he is capable of leading an NBA team for 82 games and getting them into the playoffs

Its a completely different thing doing it for 82 games, and my point isnt that he outscored Duncan, the point is that he had Duncan as the best player and main focus of the defense, so he didnt have the pressure of being the first option

He has shown he can be a dominant scorer for short stretches, but he has never proven that he could do what McGrady did for 4 seasons, not saying that he couldnt (who knows) but he hasnt done it and has never proven that he could, so saying he could is hyperthetical


let's not pretend the nba players on that argentinian national team were anything special at the time. 04 scola, nocioni, delfino, hermann, oberto? the closest thing to the worst player on the USA roster is scola and he wasn't the player then that he is now. manu was a one man wrecking crew that game if you saw it and you know he was the focus of the 08 team's defense before he went down because the USA team understood that manu was a viable first option because he lit them up just 4 years prior. he was the tournament's highest scorer after dominating it the last chance he got.


I was saying that he was playing against teams that didnt have any more than 3-4 NBA players (max) except for one team (team USA)


you lose a lot of credibility when you say ginobili is just some 6th man. he plays starters minutes, closes out games, and has easily been the 2nd or 3rd best player for the spurs pretty much since he joined the team. him coming off the bench is a strategy pop employs. he's been essentially the entire bench and our closer for years.


He was a 6th man, and he wasnt their best player, sure he was the most likely the best 6th man of the decade but you cant compare a teams 6th man to anothers superstar

Anyway, I'm sick of argueing this stuff, here is how I see it

- Tmac has put up better numbers
- Tmac has more personal (NBA) accolades, but hasnt got any international accolades due to his lack of international play
- Ginobili has had more team success, but has also been affiliated with the best team/coach/player of the decade, sure he was a intergral part of that team, but not the major piece
- Tmac hasnt been blessed in the supporting cast or coaching departments in his prime (except for one year with Yao healthy in the playoffs) and has had little team success, but that shouldnt take away from him personally as a player

[brantonli]

you base everything on personal accolades. thats why im done talking to you


wow you might just be the dumbest person to ever post on ISH

Manu Ginobili is the only player EVER to win an olympic gold medal, euroleague championship and nba championship. 2004 olympic tournament MVP, 2 time euroleague mvp, italian league mvp. McGrady hasnt won ****.


I found this sequence very funny since they were both quoting the same post.

[spursdynasty420]

winning has alot to do with it. you are either a winner or you arent. you either put fourth the effort or you dont. ala tmac and vince carter

[Dave3]

winning has alot to do with it. you are either a winner or you arent. you either put fourth the effort or you dont. ala tmac and vince carter
There's no such thing as either a player is a winner or he isn't. There's such thing as a TEAM is a winner. Kobe's won 4 championships in the past decade, so he's as good a winner as has played in the last 10 years wouldn't you agree?
But then, he won 30something games and then got knocked out of the first round two years after that when his team was bad. So how does a "winner" win less than 40 games? Because there are other factors that contribute to who wins and who doesn't, and a big part of that is who is on the team.
And the sad thing is we're not even arguing about two first options with different supporting casts, but we're talking about a first option vs. a second/third option, and you're calling the second/third option the winner? That makes absolutely no sense.

[ShaqAttack3234]

winning has alot to do with it. you are either a winner or you arent. you either put fourth the effort or you dont. ala tmac and vince carter

Carter's team has won more than Manu's this season, and Carter's numbers are better. :roll: And that's with Carter having far more years of NBA mileage on his legs.

[AlThornton]

winning has alot to do with it. you are either a winner or you arent. you either put fourth the effort or you dont. ala tmac and vince carter

actually your teammates has a lot to do with it. Have Vince Carter and Manu Ginobili switch places in their career from 2003-till now...........who has more success? Carter by a mile...

[spursdynasty420]

actually your teammates has a lot to do with it. Have Vince Carter and Manu Ginobili switch places in their career from 2003-till now...........who has more success? Carter by a mile...

you dont know because it never happened. fact remains vince carter is a underachiever

[ShaqAttack3234]

you dont know because it never happened. fact remains vince carter is a underachiever

And he's so much more talented than Ginobili that he still ended up as a better player. Ginobili has never been the type of player Carter was in his first 3 seasons in New Jersey or his prime in Toronto. The only seasons he was close to Carter's other seasons too were '08 and '05. And now in 2010, Carter remains the better player.

[joshwake]

TMac was a superstar, Manu is at best a second fiddle, a poor-mans early decade Kobe. Why even compare them?
Obviously Manu is great to have on any team because he's good in every role on the court. But I don't know if any team would rather have prime Manu over prime TMac on their team.

The answer to all your question except 4) is TMac

I would take Manu 100 times over before Mcgrady.

[spursdynasty420]

keep your all star appearances. manu has rings/medals/ggolllddddddddddd

[Big#50]

Manu is as good as any shooting guard in the league. I'll take Kobe's/Lebron's word over forum kids.

[ShaqAttack3234]

keep your all star appearances. manu has rings/medals/ggolllddddddddddd

Carter has an Olympic gold medal too. As for ring? We'll see this June. He has a better chance at a ring than Manu does this season.

[likely villain]

i would only go with manu for the 4th question b.c mcgrady's days are probably behind him and manu is probably more effective right now

manu is a good player but he was never better than tmac, imo ...

[spursdynasty420]

Carter has an Olympic gold medal too. As for ring? We'll see this June. He has a better chance at a ring than Manu does this season.

i disagree. spurs are the 2nd best team in the west right now. magic could very well be the 2nd best team in the east. a spurs vs magic finals would be rape for us

[ShaqAttack3234]

i disagree. spurs are the 2nd best team in the west right now. magic could very well be the 2nd best team in the east. a spurs vs magic finals would be rape for us

The Magic you could argue are the best in the East, after all they're the defending Eastern Conference champs and they're right in the mix for best record in the East this year despite a ton of injuries/Shard's suspension.

Did you mean you think the Spurs would rape Orlando?

[spursdynasty420]

The Magic you could argue are the best in the East, after all they're the defending Eastern Conference champs and they're right in the mix for best record in the East this year despite a ton of injuries/Shard's suspension.

Did you mean you think the Spurs would rape Orlando?


yes

[L.Kizzle]

Manu scored 7 points tonight.

[ShaqAttack3234]

yes

Why?

[spursdynasty420]

Manu scored 7 points tonight.

including a clutch drive with a minute or two left to seal the win for the spurs.

[SCdac]

Manu scored 7 points tonight.

He actually had 10/4/3 (3-3 FT, 1-2 3pt), was +6 for the game, and the Spurs won by 11...

[L.Kizzle]

He actually had 10/4/3 (3-3 FT, 1-2 3pt), was +6 for the game, and the Spurs won by 11...
My fault, he had 10.

[SayTownRy]

Manu scored 7 points tonight.

how many points did mcgrady score tonight?

[Quata]

Not that it will ever happen, but if manu somehow doesnt resign with the spurs and ends up on the rockets next year and is healthy:

PG: Brooks/Lowry
SG: Manu/Chase
SF: Ariza/Battier
PF: Scola/Landry
C: Yao/Hayes/Andersen

that team would be tight, contender for sure imo :)

just putting that out there, but yeh im not going to enter the current debate

[WeaponX2024]

how many points did mcgrady score tonight?
:oldlol:

[spursdynasty420]

Why?

well first off lets look at the starters match up

tony vs jameer - tony wins that matchup easily
tim duncan vs dwight howard - close but giving it to timmy all day
richard jefferson vs matt barnes - lol jefferson
rashard lewis vs dejuan blair - rashard has that matchup
keith bogans vs vince carter - carter has this matchup

alright so basically this is just the starters and still would take them over the magic. now lets get to the bench.

by the way the spurs have the best bench in the nba.. first in every category and orlandos bench barely has any category in the top 10 for there bench. so the spurs win that to.


ginobili > any player on that bench

[ShaqAttack3234]

well first off lets look at the starters match up

3-2 in favor of Orlando.


tony vs jameer - tony wins that matchup easily

Correct


tim duncan vs dwight howard - close but giving it to timmy all day

Nope, Howard surpassed Duncan last season and he's outplayed him head to head since the 2006-2007 season.


richard jefferson vs matt barnes - lol jefferson

Correct, but Pietrus is the starter


rashard lewis vs dejuan blair - rashard has that matchup

Correct


keith bogans vs vince carter - carter has this matchup

Correct


alright so basically this is just the starters and still would take them over the magic.

Orlando has the better starting lineup.


now lets get to the bench.

by the way the spurs have the best bench in the nba.. first in every category and orlandos bench barely has any category in the top 10 for there bench. so the spurs win that to.


ginobili > any player on that bench

The Spurs have the better bench, but orlando also has a great bench including Ryan Anderson, Jason Williams, JJ Redick, Matt Barnes, Marcin Gortat, Anthony Johnson and Brandon Bass.

[Bigsmoke]

ginobili just out played dwayne wade tonight. manu is a top 3 SG STILL

Stephen Jackson just outplayed Wade a few hours ago so he's up there with too right?

Stephen Jackson had 35

[WeaponX2024]

Howard was better than Duncan last season, but this season? He's regressed and he's not better than Duncan. He hasn't surpassed him at all. You could just call it a tease.

[L.Kizzle]

Stephen Jackson just outplayed Wade a few hours ago so he's up there with too right?

Stephen Jackson had 35
He also has a championship, BAM!

[spursdynasty420]

definately dont think howard is better then duncan at this point. i would salivate at a cavs or a magic finals vs spurs. SALIVATE

[el_locoteee]

how many points did mcgrady score tonight?

Hayes Score 6points.

Yao did not score last night.

Hayes > Yao

[EricForman]

My fault, he had 10.


so how can you accidentally mistake 7 points for 10? i mean that's a hard mistake to make if you're checking box score or watching highlights. what gives?

[robertshaw_1]

I would take Manu 1000 times over before Mcgrady or Carter....

[Bigsmoke]

so how can you accidentally mistake 7 points for 10? i mean that's a hard mistake to make if you're checking box score or watching highlights. what gives?

i guess u didnt see the point :hammerhead:

[TheBigAristotle1]

Manu w/the spurs was a better player then T-Mac with the rockets. T-Mac with the rockets was extremely inneffecient, and hurt them in a lot of ways (took to many shots, burned to much clock, killed ball movement, etc.).

T-Mac was the kind of guy who NEEDED, to play in a run and gun offense like Phoenix has right now. T-Mac in Orlando was a beast, way better then Kobe. The problem is he never had the kindof polished game that Kobe, Wade or even Lebron have. T-Mac wasn't a spectacular ball handler, shooter, or scorer in the half court, he just wasn't.

What made him unstoppable on Orlando was his transition game. Imagine gaurding an athletic 6'8"+ guy with super long arms and unlimited range. In Orlando you couldn't get your feet set against him. If you tried to gaurd his shot he would drive right past you and either dunk or splash a midrange J, if you gave him space he would drain a three, from basically anywhere.

He comes to Houston and they try and turn him into some kind of post up sf/sg, which is just dumb. He is decent in the post, but not really what you want as a first option. In the half court his average handles and weak left hand get exposed, along with his being a good but not great shooter.

Lebron is basically ambidextrous, and can finish like no other, he also has a tremendous post up and power drive game. Wade is a great ball handler, finisher, and also has a great left hand. Kobe has a nasty postup game, and midrange game, to create his own shot.

[The_Yearning]

Manu w/the spurs was a better player then T-Mac with the rockets. T-Mac with the rockets was extremely inneffecient, and hurt them in a lot of ways (took to many shots, burned to much clock, killed ball movement, etc.).

T-Mac was the kind of guy who NEEDED, to play in a run and gun offense like Phoenix has right now. T-Mac in Orlando was a beast, way better then Kobe. The problem is he never had the kindof polished game that Kobe, Wade or even Lebron have. T-Mac wasn't a spectacular ball handler, shooter, or scorer in the half court, he just wasn't.

What made him unstoppable on Orlando was his transition game. Imagine gaurding an athletic 6'8"+ guy with super long arms and unlimited range. In Orlando you couldn't get your feet set against him. If you tried to gaurd his shot he would drive right past you and either dunk or splash a midrange J, if you gave him space he would drain a three, from basically anywhere.

He comes to Houston and they try and turn him into some kind of post up sf/sg, which is just dumb. He is decent in the post, but not really what you want as a first option. In the half court his average handles and weak left hand get exposed, along with his being a good but not great shooter.

Lebron is basically ambidextrous, and can finish like no other, he also has a tremendous post up and power drive game. Wade is a great ball handler, finisher, and also has a great left hand. Kobe has a nasty postup game, and midrange game, to create his own shot.

eh?

edit your post.

[Bigsmoke]

Manu w/the spurs was a better player then T-Mac with the rockets. T-Mac with the rockets was extremely inneffecient, and hurt them in a lot of ways (took to many shots, burned to much clock, killed ball movement, etc.).

T-Mac was the kind of guy who NEEDED, to play in a run and gun offense like Phoenix has right now. T-Mac in Orlando was a beast, way better then Kobe. The problem is he never had the kindof polished game that Kobe, Wade or even Lebron have. T-Mac wasn't a spectacular ball handler, shooter, or scorer in the half court, he just wasn't.

What made him unstoppable on Orlando was his transition game. Imagine gaurding an athletic 6'8"+ guy with super long arms and unlimited range. In Orlando you couldn't get your feet set against him. If you tried to gaurd his shot he would drive right past you and either dunk or splash a midrange J, if you gave him space he would drain a three, from basically anywhere.

He comes to Houston and they try and turn him into some kind of post up sf/sg, which is just dumb. He is decent in the post, but not really what you want as a first option. In the half court his average handles and weak left hand get exposed, along with his being a good but not great shooter.

Lebron is basically ambidextrous, and can finish like no other, he also has a tremendous post up and power drive game. Wade is a great ball handler, finisher, and also has a great left hand. Kobe has a nasty postup game, and midrange game, to create his own shot.

Stop educating us with stupidity.

didnt u just say Tmac wasn't a spectacular ball handler, shooter, or scorer in the half court?

that is the most outrageous thing i have ever heard in this site.

[elementally morale]

Let's bump this.

Back in 2004-2005 it was a travesty saying I'd rather have Manu. Well the dust has settled.

[Lebron23]

Tracy Mcgrady was the better individual player while Manu was a good NBA player, but he played with Tim Duncan and Gregg Popovich.

This is like comparing James Worthy and Paul Pierce. Piece > Worthy despite worthy winning more than 2 NBA titles than him.

[ShawkFactory]

Let's bump this.

Back in 2004-2005 it was a travesty saying I'd rather have Manu. Well the dust has settled.
Such a huge difference in circumstance that it can't even be compared.

Manu never had to carry the load for an extended period of time offensively.

After he went to Orlando tmac was always the guy that defenses planned for. He didnt get to come of the bench and have Duncan and Parker take pressure off of him. He also didn't have a coach like Pop to even remotely have a system.

Manu was a superior passer in the half court, but absolutely did not have the scoring ability that tmac did..who was no slouch as a passer.

Tmac had his faults but he was better. Delt himself a shit hand and then mentally wasn't able to rise above. Manu could rise...but didn't have any pressure of failure. Because he had the greatest PF, Parker, and one of the GOAT coaches backing him up.

[oarabbus]

I'd rather be Manu than Tmac. Just like I'd rather be Bill Russell than Wilt.

[Carbine]

"Manu was a superior passer in the half court"

Manu was a more creative passer, but Tmac was a more effective passer in the half court.

[feyki]

Smart T Mac is correct answer . But had he great mind in any part of his career ? Of course , no .