Is Anyone Still Sleeping On Manu Ginobili?

[SCdac]

The spurs got knocked out 6 times with Manu.....one of them partly because he made one of the worst fouls ive ever seen on Dirk...not that the entire L is just his fault. Just...mentioning it.

Far as Manu vs Parker....eh. Year to year. I think Parker has been more reliable night to night though. but he doesnt have the attention grabbing highs like Manu. Not as many at least. But hes been pretty steady for like 8 years.

I generally agree. year to year. things fluctuate, naturally. nothing is ever set in stone. I think in terms of measuring "steadiness", Parker is pretty high (Duncan is obviously much higher). But steadiness doesn't guarantee anything. In his best championship run, Manu started most of the playoffs and averaged 30+ MPG, so we're not talking about just a bit-player.

As for the infamous foul. It was a great mistake. People had to make sure Manu was ok (mentally) after the game, because he was rightfully down about it. I live in SA and it's not forgotten about like it probably is anywhere outside this city. But also have to remember, Manu hit a HUGE three before right before that play. he's one of the reasons SA was in the series. Averaged 21 PPG and 2.3 SPG.

[Kblaze8855]

When you talk potential...I think its a lot closer than when we talk performance.

Brent was a better athlete than Manu, probably a better shooter, a similar passer(which is saying a lot), and when he attacked he could just destroy guys. But he was a transition attacker. A quick opening slasher.

He couldnt go one on one like Manu which is what held him back. But talent wise...he had basketball skills to match a number of all star types.

And when you say primes...its hard to even say with Manu. He came into the NBA at like 25 or 26. He was never a kid. I remember when a guy was saying he would be better than Kobe one day in like 02..suggesting he needed time to grow....it was mentioned in the argument that he was older than Kobe which a lot of us did not know since we didnt know anything about him. Was just an extra bit to laugh about.

Manu playing the best ball of his career is yes...far above Brent. But Manu has been of his prime age or a bit past it all his career in the NBA. How do you even define his prime? Ive seen a LOT of Manu just....existing. him having 4 points and 4 turnovers with a couple assists isnt even surprising. Hes done it this playoffs. But it doesnt get used against him because hes not expected to do much.

Hes not really a star. Hes a role player who could be a star. It really limits the criticism he can take. How do you say a guy played poorly when he takes 2 shots, played decent d, and had a couple nice passes on pick and rolls?

He didnt try to do much. So...is it playing poorly when they win anyway?

No.

Its being a role player.

Which he is waaaaaaaaaay too often for me to give him the credit I give guys leaned on to win their team games every night.

I think thats fair.

[SCdac]

When you talk potential...I think its a lot closer than when we talk performance.

Brent was a better athlete than Manu, probably a better shooter, a similar passer(which is saying a lot), and when he attacked he could just destroy guys. But he was a transition attacker. A quick opening slasher.

He couldnt go one on one like Manu which is what held him back. But talent wise...he had basketball skills to match a number of all star types.

Better athlete? debatable. Manu has dunked on the best of em, and is very athletic

better shooter? maybe from outside the paint, particularly outside the three point line... what about all the court combined, I'd take Manu

similar passer? I agree, similar, though Manu is better IMO.

better attacker? I'd take Manu in a heartbeat. this guy is relentless.

scorer, defense, slashing, intangibles (like leadership, resiliency, etc), blocks, stealing.... I'd Take Manu.

And when you say primes...its hard to even say with Manu. He came into the NBA at like 25 or 26. He was never a kid. I remember when a guy was saying he would be better than Kobe one day in like 02....it was mentioned than he was older than Kobe which a lot of us did not know since we didnt know anything about him. Was just an extra bit to laugh about.

Manu playing the best ball of his career is yes...far above Brent. But Manu has been of his prime age or a bit past it all his career in the NBA. How do you even define his prime?

Judging primes is difficult.

I'd say Manu's prime was from about 2005 to 2009 ish.

Which is why him having a big game now is noteworthy, because he's 34 about to be 35.

That comment you made about him being compared to Kobe, again just seems like overzealous fans have jaded you.

for the record, I don't think Manu is better than Kobe, West, Wade, AI, Gervin, and a handful of other greats. Probably a top-10 or top-12 SG though... out of hundreds and hundreds of guards to play in the NBA.

Definitely a HOF talent, and a multiple champion in a way that Adam Morrison cannot say he is.

Hes not really a star. Hes a role player who could be a star. It really limits the criticism he can take. How do you say a guy played poorly when he takes 2 shots, played decent d, and had a couple nice passes on pick and rolls?

you're kind of just splitting hairs IMO.

Manu is a 2 time all star, and his AS appearances were separated by a third championship and a 6MOY award. 5 years apart. We're not talking about a flash in the pan year, like say Mike James in Toronto 2006.

Ginobili has gotten plenty of blame when he doesn't show up, particularly from the people who watch the Spurs regularly. He's not some untouchable player criticism wise. He makes mistakes. he turns the ball over.... but every player does.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

Winning more titles doesn't automatically make one player superior to another. The circumstances matter. There's definitely something else sepearting Rob Horry and Jordan. That's why Jordan's better despite having one less title.

The bottomline, Manu is underrated because

- He plays for the Spurs

-played alongside the great Duncan his entire career, who had titles and great seasons prior to Manu arriving

- He comes off the bench

- He isn't particularly "Blake Griffin" flashy/exciting

- He doesn't do anything really noteworthy off the court(say drama, handling the media, etc)

-Doesn't exactly have eye popping stats

-He was never the best player on his own team for an entire season. Possibly second best in one, but this season he is definitely third.

[TMT]

^ Not too long ago he led the team in scoring with 20 PPG, coming off the bench. Don't act like Manu didn't have a decent stretch as the Spurs best player. But yeah he's vastly underrated because of all those aspects you mentioned, except the last. But he's probably the most exciting to watch of the Big 3.

[RaininTwos]

Manu is not underrated for the millionth time already. STFU.

[tpols]

KBlaze you're definitely underrating Manu.. He is far from a role player. Probabaly a top 10 SG of all time. He's like a Joe Dumars on steroids.

[Orlando Magic]

I argued back in 2004-2005 that Manu is a better player than Tracy McGrady. Would not have beaten him one on one, but as a team player and thinking of basketball as a team sport, while also considering their respective contracts, etc.

I was told (to be) a few things back then...

And you're still an absolute fu[COLOR="Black"]cki[/COLOR]ng moron if you think that he did ANYTHING better than McGrady.

[SCdac]

Jordan
Kobe
West
Gervin
Drexler
Maravich
Iverson
Havlicek
Monroe
Wade

Outside of that group, you start looking at guys like Sam Jones, Ray Allen, Reggie Miller, Joe Dumars, Manu Ginobili and some others

what I'm wondering, how is that not part of an elite group of players?

Manu being "only a 6th man" or "only a role player" is a misconception.

[NugzHeat3]

He's a great player, love watching him play.

The thing that hurts him the most in comparison to some of the higher ranked SGs is that you have to limit his minutes and he's so injury prone because of his unorthodox and reckless style of play.

On a per minute basis, he's awesome. He can make a huge impact in a limited amount of time.

[Kblaze8855]

Its not splitting hairs really. hes a 2 time all star in 10 years. hes played 30 minutes or less the last 4 years. 23 minutes a game this season. Put up 13/4. He has too many 5-7 point nights to eve bother pointing out. Its not shocking. Its how he plays. He might make 2 plays worth pointing out some games. Calling him a role player who could be a star seems totally fair.

If anything its giving him more credit than his play justifies.

He might have 29 next game and cotrol the flow with nice passing, and timely threes, and steals. He might have 7 points 2 assists and 3 turnovers as he does nothing to prevent his team losing. Neither outcome would surprise anyone or be out of character.

The standards hes held to are too low for me to call him a straight up star.

Hes a star talent who doesnt have the pressure to perform that makes a lot of stars not get the love they would if it were ok for them to no show at the rate Manu can. Can you imagine the uproar if a real star has 5-2 in a big game? People are gonna be bringing it up for years. There is a topic now on Kobe having an 8 point game 12 years ago....

Clearly Manu does not try to impose his will on games. Which is why its not playing poorly when he fails to do it. Its him...being a role player. Role players arent expected to drive the team to success nightly.

Its that star standard that makes guys like Vince and Joe Johnson look bad. If they were on teams in their primes that could win without them imposing their will at all they wouldnt be such easy targets to hate on. If Vince could just coast like Manu and have a 30 point game here and there to get massive love he wouldnt be considered a failure of a superstar.

Most guys with Manus talent dont come into a situation where the team can and has won it all without them being terribly good. Most wouldnt accept the role Manu does. And its a great positive trait.

But I dont see why we have to give Manu the winner credit and act like he had to do as much as most star guards would have to in order to win as he has.

Manu has not spent his career playing with the pressure or under the standards a guy like Vince has or Drexler had on the Blazers....

Less is expected so he can do less and not be hated on for it.

I dont think its fair to an awful ot of players to give him credit and ranking among or above them when hes not had to endure what they have to gain their status.

If Manu has a game vs the Thunder like Vince in the playoffs dropping 35/15/7 people will come into this topic acting like I underrated him for not calling him an all time elite guard.

Vince does it and you have no idea which game I mean because hes had too many like that for it to stand out and he has to do too much to be remembered.

If Vince were held to the standards Manu is hed be ranked much higher. But he isnt.

Because hes expected to do more. Manu never has been.

[nosfan773]

Manu was drafted with like pick nr. 50 or something no way he will be GOAT

[SCdac]

Clearly Manu does not try to impose his will on games.

riiiight

he just sits around and cherry picks, loafs, kicks back, etc... he just waits for the right time, or the right day.

Not going to respond to every point you make... agree to disagree.

Manu has never had his own team (he probably could if he was greedy or a whiny bitch like many "stars")... I don't personally hold that against him. It's out of his control largely.

Had he had his own team I'd say he would be a perennial All Star with less championships, but still regarded as great. He's probably have a bigger contract, and be looked at in a different light by casual fans. Because he'd be putting up big(ger) stats on a not so great team... but hey stats are everything!

But being a KEY cog to a multiple championship team, that warrants recognition, absolutely it does. It's hardly something to hold against him. Being a team player, let alone an All Star team player, is indeed a very positive trait. Had he cried his way off the team or off the bench (knowing he's better than just a bench player), his name would be in the news more, maybe be more known, but not for good reasons.

[Kblaze8855]

I think you are way off on what casual fans respect. Casual fans dont know Joe Johnson and wlll never really hear much coverage of him. They will see and respect Manu because Manu plays on a team that will win enough to make that happen.

If you polled fans on if they want Manu or Bucks Michael Redd Manu would win. They wont even know Michael Redd and his 26ppg....


And no. Manu does not often try to impose his will on games. Hes not out there having 5 point games with 2 assists or 10 and 3 games because hes incapable of taking over. He has them because hes coasting.

Coasting here not said to mean he isnt playing hard. Im saying hes not trying to take over personally even from a playmaking angle.

Hes just being one of the guys. Manu isnt worried about who does anything so long as his team wins.

[SCdac]

Coasting here not said to mean he isnt playing hard. Im saying hes not trying to take over personally even from a playmaking angle.

Hes just being one of the guys. Manu isnt worried about who does anything so long as his team wins.

You're wrong about the playmaking part, Manu has for years held the ball in closing moments of the game (he's the Spurs closer), and acts as a PG often when Parker is on the bench. Manu is #45 all time in playoff assists, which is nothing to scoff at. For reference, Reggie Miller played in 144 playoff games (1,000+ more minutes than Manu), yet has about 140 less assists than Ginobili.

In the 2005 championship run, Parker lead the Spurs with 4.3 APG and Ginobili was right there with 4.2 APG. Point being, Manu some times take the back seat as a scorer (naturally, on a deep team with TD), but his passing game has been integral to the Spurs of the mid-2000s, especially when comes off the bench.

But, are you insinuating that he should disrupt the flow of his team and the game, and start trying to take over? That he should hold his own personal glory above team glory?... or are you saying he can't do that? Either way, I don't think he should do that, nor do I think he's incapable. He's taken over plenty and plenty and plenty of games, and that's on a deep team. On his own team, of course he would do what it takes to win, which would lead to gaudy stats, which would lead toward more recognition from casual fans.