Klay Thompson or Manu Ginobili?

[superduper]

I'm not talking about who is the better player or who had the better career. Those are hard to judge because of the different roles each player served for their teams. Even though they both were essentially the 2nd/3rd offensive options on their teams most of the time, they both provided their own unique impact for their teams.

Manu was better at creating for himself and his team and making seemingly impossible plays against extremely tight defenses and was also one of the emotional leaders of his team providing much needed energy off the bench when they needed it. Klay is one of the most low maintenance stars of all time who can get you 20ppg efficiently without a single play being run for him scoring without any wasted dribbles and playing elite D while never complaining.

With Manu's career being over and having withnessed Klay's peak (assuming he doesn't become better than what he is now which I think is a safe assumption; he is what he is which is one of the greatest true 3&d players of all time), who would you rather use your high draft pick on (disregarding team makeup and fit)?

Klay will probably win in a landslide but I'm just curious to see what people think.

[SouBeachTalents]

Who was better? Very debatable

Who would I rather have, especially in this era? Klay

[elementally morale]

Manu.

The difference is not as big if they are 2nd or 3rd options on offense but Ginobili was also a great decision maker, great passer and team orchestrator. Klay may be better as a solid member of the team but Manu you can trust to lead the team, make the important decisions, etc.

[Haymaker]

Manu, hands down. Klay is just a 3&D player who shoots exceptionally well because he plays with two other perimeter threats and gets many open shots. Manu was an all-around player who could play-make as well as score. He could've led a team to the Playoffs as the main star. His leadership and franchise potential were evident when he led his team to the Gold Medal at the Olympics.

[ImKobe]

Klay

Arguably the GOAT spot-up shooter and one of the better defensive players in today's NBA. Manu can do more for a team but you can't build a contender around either of them. I'd rather have Klay spacing the floor and getting high-percentage 3s for my team than Manu dribbling the basketball.

[Shogon]

Depends on what your team needs, tbh.

Klay is a better fit for pretty much any team in the league that has a legitimate star player on it, and it doesn't matter what era you put him in except pre three point line... he'd still be better for any team that has a legit star, in any era post 3 point line.

Manu would be better at being "the man" but a team with Manu as the clear cut #1 option isn't winning a title, so does that even matter?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I'd take Klay unless my team was littered with 3&D players.

Not very many do it better than him though. So yeah, I'd roll with Klay 9/10 times.

[PeroAntic]

Manu is a better player, but Klay is more useful in the current era.

[Mr. Jabbar]

The fact that its a tough question while Klay is having an awesome Finals makes me think Manu is the answer.

[superduper]

Pleasantly surprised with how even the results are turning out to be.

Manu was a fking G :rockon:

[r0drig0lac]

Manu easily

[superduper]

Manu easily

Manu was definitely the better individual player but when it comes to overall team impact while taking everything into account, I think it's closer than people are leading on.

IMO of course though.

[Shogon]

Manu is a better player, but Klay is more useful in the current era.

Klay is more useful in any era that has a 3 point line.

[1987_Lakers]

Manu is a more versatile offensive player, but Klay overall is a better scorer and defender. Tough call, might go with Klay.

[superduper]

Klay is more useful in any era that has a 3 point line.

I wonder how Klay would fare while dealing with the wear and tear of playing in the more physically defensive eras that Manu faced

[thefatmiral]

3d player vs complete baller. Give me manu, dang consider primes and ability to change games with his hustle it's easy.

[superduper]

3d player vs complete baller. Give me manu, dang consider primes and ability to change games with his hustle it's easy.

Manu was the more complete offensive player but in terms of overall production they are not far off offensively. Then you consider Klay's elite defense that he brings night in and night out and the comparison becomes closer.

[elementally morale]

Manu was the more complete offensive player but in terms of overall production they are not far off offensively. Then you consider Klay's elite defense that he brings night in and night out and the comparison begins closer.


Back in the day (2004-5 ish) I was arguing Manu vs. McGrady. While I was saying McGrady was the better individual player I insisted I'd want Manu on my team for two reasons: he is a total team player and he is very cheap to have. McGrady was a not good enough franchise player and Manu was everything he was asked to do... and more.

I think price also is an issue. Ginobili was not paid like a superstar and he had little problem coming off the bench if it was for the betterment of the team. And his salary was affordable. Klay is a max or near the max player... and I don't see how he is that much more valuable.

[warriorfan]

Manus Finals performance in 2005 was far better than any of Klay

[SouBeachTalents]

[QUOTE=warriorfan]Manus Finals performance in 2005 was far better than any of Klay

[warriorfan]

Klay's the better defender too bro

Not at all. They are neck and neck or edge goes to Manu. He was a defensive stud 15 years ago. Don

[1987_Lakers]

Not at all. They are neck and neck or edge goes to Manu. He was a defensive stud 15 years ago. Don’t let old Manu cloud your judgement.

Lmao, Manu didn't have Klay's defensive abilities, gtfo.

[Smoke117]

Who was better? Very debatable

Who would I rather have, especially in this era? Klay

Manu has been a much higher impact player throughout his career. Regardless of the era, this wouldn't change.

[ralph_i_el]

Manu could do magic off the dribble. He wasn't a slouch in spot-up situations either. Give me Manu

[Smoke117]

Manu could do magic off the dribble. He wasn't a slouch in spot-up situations either. Give me Manu

He was also a much more impactful defensive player. Klay is incredibly overrated in this regard.

[fsvr54]

Y'all act like there's this gulf in shooting ability.

Manu could definitely shoot and he hit a bunch of clutch jumpers in his life.

I'll take him over Klay any day, any year, any universe.

[RoseCity07]

If I could get prime Manu for 10 years I'd take him over Kobe. He was really good.

[bigkingsfan]

Purely from a health/minutes side, I'd take Klay.

[red1]

can't go wrong with either of these guys.

[Noyze]

It's close. Against the best defense in the world you could give it to prime Manu to make a play, Klay not so much. Klay cause so many problems off the ball though, it's just so close based on what your team needs.

[ArbitraryWater]

"Not asking who the better player is"

Yes, you actually are, numb nuts :lol

[MrFonzworth]

"Not asking who the better player is"

Yes, you actually are, numb nuts :lol
No, hes asking who we prefer.

No wonder you got ran out of class, the dude who kicked your ass was probably sick of your stuttering sub 90 IQ ass.

[nayte]

I went with Manu. I get what klay brings just a personal preference I guess

[superduper]

No, hes asking who we prefer.

No wonder you got ran out of class, the dude who kicked your ass was probably sick of your stuttering sub 90 IQ ass.

Arbitrary is the ISH jizz rag :lol

It's tough when your English reading level has never exceeded the 4th grade standard :(

[superduper]

I don't know if I should be surprised at the results but they definitely aren't what I was expecting, not in such a landslide for Manu anyway.

Man I miss the insanely skilled players with competitive integrity of the past like Manu/Yao/AK/etc. Just seems like such a soft ass superfriends superteam ass era these days.

[Artillery]

If I could get prime Manu for 10 years I'd take him over Kobe. He was really good.

Yup. Just look at how badly prime Kobe failed against the Pistons in 2004 and how prime Manu sliced up that exact same Pistons defense with ease a year later. That same playoffs, he outplayed mvp Steve Nash and had the Spurs beating Suns at their own style. Klay would fail spectacularly against those two teams, especially if Spurs were forced to rely on crappy Tony Parker as the primary playmaker. Manu's health issues held him back from being able to play large minutes and prevented him from being viewed as a superstar. But his impact is undeniable.

[StrongLurk]

OP actually made a decent thread for once.

My instincts go with Manu...but Klay could be the better player. Too close.

[Gougou]

I respect Manu's game and his playmaking ability, and all his contribution to make the team better

But... I would still go with Klay. He is also quite clutch and always show up big.

[Smoke117]

I don't know if I should be surprised at the results but they definitely aren't what I was expecting, not in such a landslide for Manu anyway.

Man I miss the insanely skilled players with competitive integrity of the past like Manu/Yao/AK/etc. Just seems like such a soft ass superfriends superteam ass era these days.

Ironic post considering Manu is one of the biggest floppers ever and I've seen you go in on Bran a ton when it comes to flopping.

[Manny98]

Manu is better

But i prefer Klay because of his ability to score without the basketball

[bizil]

Skill for skill, Manu is superior to Klay. In terms of passing, handles, scoring skillset, etc. And Manu could play and defend PG, SG, and SF. BUT FLAT OUT, Klay is the better player. For starters, he's the BEST BLEND of pure shooting and defense we've ever seen in the NBA. Secondly, I think Klay could be the #1 option on another contending team. In the vein of a Dale Ellis, Glen Rice, or Reggie Miller type for example. But I think even better than those sharpshooters!

And if we are just talking two way ability in general, he's among the top 10 SG's to ever in the league. U got legends like MJ, Kobe, D Wade, West, Dumars, and Moncrief in that mix. BUT Klay is right in there as well. NO WAY would Pop bring a prime Klay Thompson off the bench if he had him. There's A REASON WHY Manu came off the bench all those years in the league.

Manu LITERALLY had it all in his arsenal EXCEPT the motor-durability to be an alpha dog scorer. HE had the mentality and skills for sure though! If Manu had that, he would be a top 10 SG peak and GOAT wise in my opinion. But instead he was an All Star type player BUT never a superstar. I don't think I've ever seen a player so skilled that wasn't a superstar level player! I would say Manu and Sheed are two guys that qualify for that!

[superduper]

Ironic post considering Manu is one of the biggest floppers ever and I've seen you go in on Bran a ton when it comes to flopping.

Flopping with integrity and flopping like a bitch (elevating your 6pt finals game to an 8pt finals game/flying back 20 feet when being inadvertently slapped in the face) are two completely different things.

[Smoke117]

Flopping with integrity and flopping like a bitch (elevating your 6pt finals game to an 8pt finals game/flying back 20 feet when being inadvertently slapped in the face) are two completely different things.

AKA Flopping is okay if it's a guy I like, but not okay if it's a guy I hate. Basically, you're full of shit.

[Carbine]

Manu is better at being the man, Klay is better playing on a team with other stars.

He's a better more versatile defender. He is doing great work on Kawhi this series & he's the chosen defender for a guy like Kyrie as well. That's a wide range of play styles he is the chosen defender for.

Manu was not that dude on defense.

The fact Klay can and has taken 5 dribbles all game in the half court to score 40 is unique. That is THE perfect player to surround a ball dominant player with.

[SouBeachTalents]

Manu is better at being the man, Klay is better playing on a team with other stars.

He's a better more versatile defender. He is doing great work on Kawhi this series & he's the chosen defender for a guy like Kyrie as well. That's a wide range of play styles he is the chosen defender for.

Manu was not that dude on defense.

The fact Klay can and has taken 5 dribbles all game in the half court to score 40 is unique. That is THE perfect player to surround a ball dominant player with.
I just don't see the relevance that has in this discussion. A team with Manu as it's best player would never accomplish anything. The debate should really be who you would rather have as your 2nd/3rd option

[Carbine]

It's not impossible to win with Manu as your best offensive player.

A lot of things need to be right around him though. Manu on the Pistons instead of Rip, they'd still win probably. Was Garnett the #1 option on the Celtics? It was close between him and PP, Manu could have replaced PP and either been the 1A or 1B offensive player better than what Klay could have been I believe.

[ILLsmak]

Manu is a more versatile offensive player, but Klay overall is a better scorer and defender. Tough call, might go with Klay.

Yea it doesn't take John Stockton to hit klay coming off a screen. I think he'd go in anyway. That he doesn't dribble too much is not a huge downside. Manu is really a hard player to rate because he was a bball virtuoso. But does that mean he's better than a guy who can lock down better than him and score 30 in a quarter? I don't know.

-Smak

[RRR3]

Flopping with integrity and flopping like a bitch (elevating your 6pt finals game to an 8pt finals game/flying back 20 feet when being inadvertently slapped in the face) are two completely different things.
:biggums:


This dude’s obsessive LeBron hatred causes him to say some ridiculous things :oldlol:

[1987_Lakers]

Give me Klay after tonight's performance.