Tony Parker or Chauncey Billups

[Da Heroic One]

1.) Who has had the better career?

2.) Who is the better player today?

3.) Who was better in their primes?

4.) Are both of them Hall of Famers? Or is only one of them Hall of famers? If so, which one is the one?

[Kellogs4toniee]

1.) Who has had the better career?

2.) Who is the better player today?

3.) Who was better in their primes?

4.) Are both of them Hall of Famers? Or is only one of them Hall of famers? If so, which one is the one?


1. Chauncey Billups
2. Tony Parker
3. Tony Parker
4. I have a really hard time putting Tony Parker as a hall of famer. To me, he's always benefited from having Duncan and that Spurs defensive system mask any of his weaknesses. I think ultimately Billups will be the only one out of the two to get into the hall of fame.

[SsKSpurs21]

i actually when the other way...

1) Tony Parker
2) Tony Parker
3) Chauncey Billups
4) i dont think either of them will get into the HOF. neither has done anything significant to be HOF worthy. Parkers resume has more on it than billups, but i dont think its enough to get into the hall of fame.

[AMISTILLILL]

1.) Who has had the better career?
Tony Parker. He's been a integral part of that Spurs system for several years now, spending most of that time completely untouchable to trades. He's shaped himself to fit the demands of Pop's offense and defensive schemes beautifully.

Billups has been shipped around quite a bit, only seeing real success with Detroit and, for a short period, with Denver. While I think he's an excellent player, I think Parker gets the nod for 'best career' based solely on his part in maintaining the Spurs consistency in excellence. Three rings in five years speaks volumes.

2.) Who is the better player today?
Overall, Tony Parker. As long as he's slashing and hangs onto some of his speed, he'll be a better player than Chauncey, who appears to be breaking down. But I'd still take Billups as my floor general any day of the week.

3.) Who was better in their primes?
Chauncey Billups. You forget just how solid a player the guy was during that Detroit hey-day because he was on a team filled with solid players, while it's difficult to know just how much of Parkers performance was a product of the system he was in.

4.) Are both of them Hall of Famers? Or is only one of them Hall of famers? If so, which one is the one?
Tony Parker is definitely up for HOF considerations not too long after he retires. I think it will likely take Billups a bit longer, however.

[FourthTenor]

I would rather have prime Billups than prime Parker.

The "whose career was better" stuff means nothing to me because people largely base that on team success and just end up letting the players' teammates dictate the outcome.

The Spurs could have won each of their titles just as easily with Billups, IMO. I don't know that the Pistons make back to back finals and win one with Parker in place of Billups. In fact I doubt they do.

Give me Chauncey. As far as HOF, I personally wouldnt put either in. Once again, you're gonna have people who are dummies want to put Parker in because of the TEAM success he was a part of. He's not an all-time point guard worth memorializing by any stretch, he was simply a good contributor on a very good team. There have been countless PG's better than Tony Parker.

[knickscity]

Tony Parker for numbers 1,2, although it's biased as far as who had the better career.

TP played with arguably the best PF ever.

Chauncey for number 3.

HOF? I don't think either get in, but I wouldn't be shocked if either did.

[Stuckey]

i`d take prime chauncey over prime parker

but parker had a better career, let`s not kid ourselves

[FourthTenor]

i`d take prime chauncey over prime parker

but parker had a better career, let`s not kid ourselves


and adam morrison has had a better career than al jefferson, right?

[Kevin_Gamble]

and adam morrison has had a better career than al jefferson, right?

Are you seriously arguing that Parker was not an integral part of those SA championship runs?

[AMISTILLILL]

and adam morrison has had a better career than al jefferson, right?

Dude... Tony Parker won Finals MVP on a team with Tim Duncan. Forget the rings, that's the accomplishment.

[Bigsmoke]

1.) Who has had the better career?
maybe Parker. more rings

2.) Who is the better player today?
Parker i guess

3.) Who was better in their primes?
Billups. They went head-to-Head in the Finals and Billups was more impressive.

4.) Are both of them Hall of Famers? Or is only one of them Hall of famers? If so, which one is the one?

ummm... shit pick whoever

[FourthTenor]

Dude... Tony Parker won Finals MVP on a team with Tim Duncan. Forget the rings, that's the accomplishment.

You know Billups is also a Finals MVP, right?

[AMISTILLILL]

You know Billups is also a Finals MVP, right?

Who doesn't?

Tim Duncan is arguably the greatest player at his position in league history. While Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, Tayshaun Prince and Rip Hamilton were great players at that point in their career, winning Finals MVP over a guaranteed first ballot HOF'r is a HUGE achievement and greatly outshines Billups'.

The point isn't winning Finals MVP, it's winning it convincingly over one of the greatest players the game has ever seen.

[dbugz]

and adam morrison has had a better career than al jefferson, right?


Dude stop making yourself look so stupid on this thread.

Just stop.

[TrueGreenFan]

Parker has had a better/more consistent career but Billups prime>>>Parkers prime.

[Bigsmoke]

Who doesn't?

Tim Duncan is arguably the greatest player at his position in league history. While Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, Tayshaun Prince and Rip Hamilton were great players at that point in their career, winning Finals MVP over a guaranteed first ballot HOF'r is a HUGE achievement and greatly outshines Billups'.

The point isn't winning Finals MVP, it's winning it convincingly over one of the greatest players the game has ever seen.

2004 Lakers >>>> 2007 Cavs

[rodman91]

1.) Who has had the better career?

2.) Who is the better player today?

3.) Who was better in their primes?

4.) Are both of them Hall of Famers? Or is only one of them Hall of famers? If so, which one is the one?

1.Parker or equal.Parker has better stas & more rings.He was 2nd or 3rd best player in team though.Billups was leader of his team when they have won.

2.Parker - He had great %FG over Billups this year. same ppg & more apg in much better team.

3.Billups - He was better leader.Better perimeter shooter.Better at assists.Better at clutch.Better at defense.

4.Parker has 3 rings & FMVP.Better car.He deserves more than Billups.

[dbugz]

One is a bit overrated and the other one is a bit underrated, you know who's who.

[FourthTenor]

Who doesn't?

Tim Duncan is arguably the greatest player at his position in league history. While Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, Tayshaun Prince and Rip Hamilton were great players at that point in their career, winning Finals MVP over a guaranteed first ballot HOF'r is a HUGE achievement and greatly outshines Billups'.

The point isn't winning Finals MVP, it's winning it convincingly over one of the greatest players the game has ever seen.


thats a very arbitrary and meaningless criteria. if you want to go that route, you could say the lakers team that billups won his against was a much better opponent than the cavs team parker won his against.

finals mvps are over-rated just like any award thats voted on by a largely lazy and ignorant media (or fans).

anyways, i get that these are the kinds of things people are gonna use to compare "careers", i just think thats a dumb way to compare guys. career paths are HUGELY influenced by chance, why not just compare the two as players? rather than who played more years with a better team and who won x amount of popularity contest all-star games and lazily voted on mvp's

[AMISTILLILL]

thats a very arbitrary and meaningless criteria. if you want to go that route, you could say the lakers team that billups won his against was a much better opponent than the cavs team parker won his against.

finals mvps are over-rated just like any award thats voted on by a largely lazy and ignorant media (or fans).

anyways, i get that these are the kinds of things people are gonna use to compare "careers", i just think thats a dumb way to compare guys. career paths are HUGELY influenced by chance, why not just compare the two as players? rather than who played more years with a better team and who won x amount of popularity contest all-star games and lazily voted on mvp's

Then you personally don't have to do it.

Fact of the matter is that's the topic of the thread. Reasons for deciding between both players are supposed to be arbitrary, or else the thread wouldn't exist.

[Da Heroic One]

One is a bit overrated and the other one is a bit underrated, you know who's who.
Actually, I don't.

[kaiiu]

1.) Who has had the better career?

2.) Who is the better player today?

3.) Who was better in their primes?

4.) Are both of them Hall of Famers? Or is only one of them Hall of famers? If so, which one is the one?
1) Parker
2) Parker
3) Parker
4) Yes both hof

[Stuckey]

which of the two would you want on your team, given both in their primes??

[kaiiu]

which of the two would you want on your team, given both in their primes??
Parker. He can actually carry a team scoring wise for the most part of a season. He did it in 09

[TheMarkMadsen]

Is it seriously a question if they both will make the HOF? Everybody makes the Basketball HOF, considering their both former FMVP i think its a lock

[bluechox2]

parker overall

[T_L_P]

Outside of Parker's peak (2013 Regular Season), Billups was the better player.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Outside of Parker's peak (2013 Regular Season), Billups was the better player.
:biggums:

[Suguru101]

Outside of Parker's peak (2013 Regular Season), Billups was the better player.

Why do you have Edward as your avatar? Change that shit, dude. Lmao, just kidding.

Anyways, Parker in everything.

[BasedTom]

Chauncey Billups
Chauncey Billups
Chauncey Billups
Chauncey Billups

[T_L_P]

I think a lot of people finally starting watching the Spurs in 2012/2013 and they think Parker has always been that effective.

That's really not the case.

On the whole the Spurs have performed better with Parker on the bench. This was especially true last postseason, and people without an agenda easily recognised this (with Manu/Mills/CoJo running the point, we had defense everywhere on the court and the ball wasn't sticking like it did with TP).

Just look at the numbers.

2002-2014 Playoffs, the Spurs are a +3.8 with Parker on the court (7004 minutes) and a +5.3 with him off it (2485 minutes).

2003 Playoffs: +1.2 with Parker, +18.2 without him. :biggums:

2005 Playoffs: +3.9 with Parker, +6.6 without him.

2007 Playoffs: +4.7 with him, +2.4 without him. That was clearly Parker's best title run.

2014 Playoffs: +8.0 with him, +14.0 without him.

Career +0.2 Box Plus/Minus for Parker.

-1.8 in 03
-2.0 in 05
-1.2 in 14
+0.5 in 07

Career .089 WS/48, TS% of .518 (with a 27.8 USG%, higher than Duncan's who has a career +5.9 BPM and .199 WS/48).

Parker is the epitome of a system player. It's not like he does anything that transcends his numbers. He was asked to co-lead the team from 09-11 and those were our darkest years...and what did Tony do? Make rap music, open nightclubs, and throw his entire team under the bus ("we're not contenders anymore").

Charles Barkley recently said Parker was the best Spur in 05....here's what he did in the Finals that year:

13.9 PPG
2.4 RPG
3.4 APG
.471 TS%
89 ORtg
5.3 GameScore (compared to 15.9 for Duncan and 14.1 for Manu)

Pop was thinking about benching Parker again because Billups was running train on him.

Duncan and Manu were the Big 2. There were certain years where Parker came close to matching the impact of those two superstars (09, 12), but that doesn't override all the years where he was a complete turd (03, 05, 06).

It's not really controversial to say Billups was a better basketball player, imo. He had pretty great longevity and he actually raised his game come Playoff time, embarrassing the Lakers and Tony Parker in consecutive years (21/3/5/.696 TS% against the Lakers and 20/5/6/.570 TS% against the Spurs).

Rant over.

Edit: and that's not to take anything away from 2013 Parker. He was a legitimate MVP candidate that year. But it was one season. It was far from the norm.