Official Manu Ginobili Thread

[Jadaki 0]

You say: Ginobili is 3rd option he'd be higher if he was a better player.I say: Eddy Curry is 1st option, there are countless #2s in the league better than him.You say: You can't compare 1st options to others, you have to look at the whole team.I guess I can't comprehend your arguments jumping all over the place and not making sense.

I never said the bolded part, maybe you should quit having imaginary conversations and read what I said. I said if your telling me being #3 on a winning team makes you a better play than the #1 on a losing team you are wrong, and I provided two quick samples to back that argument (KG and Kobe), but if you want to go down the list team for team we can. Also calling Curry the #1 on the Knicks is silly, Randolph is a bigger threat as are a few of their guards.Poker != NBA and bb/100 != Efficiency rating.If you want to make the comparison though, considering Marion is putting in more minutes against starters then his 6bb/100 at 25/50 is better than Manu's 7bb/100 at 10/20. This might be the most retarded comparison ever made, and it's your fault.Even with your stat inflated to per 48 minutes, he is behind Marion so whats the excuse for that? And it still doesn't explain why if he is that good, he isn't putting in those minutes starter or otherwise. If he is clearly better than Finley or whoever else you want to say starts in front of him, why doesn't he at least get more minutes? If he is so efficient, why is he on the bench over 1/3rd of the game? If he wasn't starting and putting in 40 minutes a game, it wouldn't matter. Lately though, he doesn't start and he is putting in 28-30 which is clearly minutes a sub plays. So apparently a lot of playtime goes to that Spurs supporting cast you always claim is trash, yet they are taking Manu's minutes.

[tskillz187 0]

I never said the bolded part, maybe you should quit having imaginary conversations and read what I said. I said if your telling me being #3 on a winning team makes you a better play than the #1 on a losing team you are wrong, and I provided two quick samples to back that argument (KG and Kobe), but if you want to go down the list team for team we can. Also calling Curry the #1 on the Knicks is silly, Randolph is a bigger threat as are a few of their guards.

I never made that argument. I did make the argument if you're #3 on a winning team and your team beats another winning team every year they've faced each other in the playoffs that you're the better #3.Also, he's not #3. He's leading his team in ppg. And he's going to be an all-star this yr, Marion won't sniff that.

Poker != NBA and bb/100 != Efficiency rating.

Is this does not equal sign? I was trying to make my point clear, apparently you understnad the point but can't draw simple conclusions.

If you want to make the comparison though, considering Marion is putting in more minutes against starters then his 6bb/100 at 25/50 is better than Manu's 7bb/100 at 10/20. This might be the most retarded comparison ever made, and it's your fault.

Yes, it's retarded. Manu plays a smaller level why? They play in the same league. Against the same teams. Manu does better.

Even with your stat inflated to per 48 minutes, he is behind Marion so whats the excuse for that?

Sigh.http://www.nba.com/statistics/player/Effic...tDD=All%20Teams There. That is a link to efficiency/48 minutes supplied by nba.com I'd assume that would be more accurate than you just making stuff up. Again you are wrong. Ginobili is ahead of Marion. I'm sure you won't admit it though. Quantitative quoted data that you are incorrect won't phase you.

And it still doesn't explain why if he is that good, he isn't putting in those minutes starter or otherwise. If he is clearly better than Finley or whoever else you want to say starts in front of him, why doesn't he at least get more minutes? If he is so efficient, why is he on the bench over 1/3rd of the game? If he wasn't starting and putting in 40 minutes a game, it wouldn't matter. Lately though, he doesn't start and he is putting in 28-30 which is clearly minutes a sub plays. So apparently a lot of playtime goes to that Spurs supporting cast you always claim is trash, yet they are taking Manu's minutes.

The point is to win, right? The Spurs seem to know how to do that. Probably by playing their older players less in the regular season to give them more minutes in the playoffs and to stay fresh. You also don't take into account the blowouts the Spurs have where he sits most of the 4th. MPG are a pretty stupid stat, obviously he is out there for every possession at the end of close games, that's what matters. I doubt you'll agree with it though.None of the Spurs avg more than 34mpg. They all must suck all sitting almost 1/3 of the game!

[Jadaki 0]

I never made that argument. I did make the argument if you're #3 on a winning team and your team beats another winning team every year they've faced each other in the playoffs that you're the better #3.

Not what this says...

The #1 option on bad teams is better than 2nd and 3rd options on good teams? Since when? That - as is the case with many of your arguments - just isn't true.

Also because one team beats another the #3 player on the winning team is not by default better than the #3 on the losing team, key word here is team. Last I checked the Spurs didn't even play the full Suns roster the entire series last year, gg stupid suspensions and antiquated rules. Kobe is on a bad team, KG was on a horrible team for most of his career. Do you understand what I am telling you now?

Also, he's not #3. He's leading his team in ppg. And he's going to be an all-star this yr, Marion won't sniff that.

#1, and isn't a starter... he comes off the bench. Do you see why that doesn't make sense? Also I checked All Star voting, most current numbers I could find have the western conference voting like this. 5th place doesn't get you on the team.Kobe Bryant, LA Lakers, 569,302Tracy McGrady, Houston, 388,959Steve Nash, Phoenix, 317,091Allen Iverson, Denver, 292,565Manu Ginobili, San Antonio, 141,891Jason Terry, Dallas, 121,397Tony Parker, San Antonio, 117,881Chris Paul, New Orleans, 110,688Jerry Stackhouse, Dallas, 103,307Baron Davis, Golden State, 100,422Forward voting = Shawn Marion, Phoenix, 154,641Looks like 13k more votes for Marion.

Is this does not equal sign? I was trying to make my point clear, apparently you understnad the point but can't draw simple conclusions.

Yes that is the sign for does not equal.

Yes, it's retarded. Manu plays a smaller level why? They play in the same league. Against the same teams. Manu does better.

I'm saying that playing against the other teams backups and racking up numbers isn't as easy as putting up those same numbers consistently as a starter. Something Manu is struggling with since a few injuries have happened, or do you need me to post stat lines from games you talked about earlier without Duncan where he managed 11 points?

Sigh.http://www.nba.com/statistics/player/Effic...tDD=All%20Teams There. That is a link to efficiency/48 minutes supplied by nba.com I'd assume that would be more accurate than you just making stuff up. Again you are wrong. Ginobili is ahead of Marion. I'm sure you won't admit it though. Quantitative quoted data that you are incorrect won't phase you.The point is to win, right? The Spurs seem to know how to do that. Probably by playing their older players less in the regular season to give them more minutes in the playoffs and to stay fresh. You also don't take into account the blowouts the Spurs have where he sits most of the 4th. MPG are a pretty stupid stat, obviously he is out there for every possession at the end of close games, that's what matters. I doubt you'll agree with it though.None of the Spurs avg more than 34mpg. They all must suck all sitting almost 1/3 of the game!

So he is 19th as of today, and Marion is 24th.... wow huge leap. Lets look at career averages and see who finishes in the top ten of that list every year and who is usually around 30-40th. Or do you just want to use the one small sample size of 20 games this year to try and make a point when over his career he isn't even close to Marion.Is Andrew Bynum better than Manu, he is ahead of him on your stat list and playing 3 less minutes per game so he is clearly better?And like I said, when you look at actual efficiency, Marion is still ahead of him. If Manu was clearly the more efficient player, he would play more, or starting... simple as that.As far as who on the Spurs gets minutes, you really need to make up your mind if everyone else sucks and Manu runs the team or if maybe he is just a cog in a well oiled machine? Problem is if you accept that he isn't a stand out over the other players, you are back peddling from your stance that the rest the team sucks and Manu carries them to titles. Quite the conundrum.

[tskillz187 0]

Not what this says...

Yes it is what that says. Being the #1 option does not make you better than #2 or #3s on other teams. Nowhere have I ever said that #2 or #3 on teams are auto better than #1's. You can't blanket #1s as being better than #2s or #3s that's my point.

Also because one team beats another the #3 player on the winning team is not by default better than the #3 on the losing team, key word here is team. Last I checked the Spurs didn't even play the full Suns roster the entire series last year, gg stupid suspensions and antiquated rules. Kobe is on a bad team, KG was on a horrible team for most of his career. Do you understand what I am telling you now?

I never said anything about Kobe or KG being bad. I'm saying not all #1s are better than all #2s. It's a pretty simple concept. I understand they were on bad teams, not all bad teams have no #1 but many do. Is Joe Johnson a #1? Probably not. The Hawks don't have one. The Grizz don't have one. Etc. Just because you're the best on your team doesn't mean you're better than 2nd best on other teams.

#1, and isn't a starter... he comes off the bench. Do you see why that doesn't make sense?

No, this doesn't neccessarily mean anything. You don't have to start your 5 best players. Has Ginobili ever not been in at the end of a meaningful game? That's where you see who a coach thinks are his best players. You can certainly be the #1 scoring option and come off of the bench. I think it's pretty clearly the case right now for the Spurs.

Also I checked All Star voting, most current numbers I could find have the western conference voting like this. 5th place doesn't get you on the team.Kobe Bryant, LA Lakers, 569,302Tracy McGrady, Houston, 388,959Steve Nash, Phoenix, 317,091Allen Iverson, Denver, 292,565Manu Ginobili, San Antonio, 141,891Jason Terry, Dallas, 121,397Tony Parker, San Antonio, 117,881Chris Paul, New Orleans, 110,688Jerry Stackhouse, Dallas, 103,307Baron Davis, Golden State, 100,422Forward voting = Shawn Marion, Phoenix, 154,641

I know you're smart enough to understand that guards are more popular than forwards because they are flashier. Obv it's going to be harder to make the team as a guard in a guard dominated league. He will make the All-Star team because other coach's in the league will vote him in. I'm pretty confident in that. You know Marion has much less real competition and you aren't trying to compare votes of guards to forwards. This is fan voting you know. Each fan probably understands the game less than you and you can't even see Manu should be an All-Star.

I'm saying that playing against the other teams backups and racking up numbers isn't as easy as putting up those same numbers consistently as a starter. Something Manu is struggling with since a few injuries have happened, or do you need me to post stat lines from games you talked about earlier without Duncan where he managed 11 points?So he is 19th as of today, and Marion is 24th.... wow huge leap. Lets look at career averages and see who finishes in the top ten of that list every year and who is usually around 30-40th. Or do you just want to use the one small sample size of 20 games this year to try and make a point when over his career he isn't even close to Marion.

I'm sorry at what point is the sub time? Wait coaches can sub whenever they want? Oh...so like other coaches can decide whether or not backups are in at certain times. Hm...Ginobili has no control over whether or not subs go in when he goes in, just when he plays. It has absoltely no bearing on who he's playing against, just who he is playing with. So don't tell me he plays against backups. You are just guessing, it's completely coach and sub-time dependent.Stat line when Duncan was out: 24.9ppg. Geez, you're making me look stupid. 2-2 record against Dallas, Utah, Golden St, and LAL. LAL game was without Parker and Duncan, and Parker was injured in Golden St. game. Those were the two losses... So please don't pull out his stats while Duncan is out, that'd be scary!Ginobili has only been playing significant minutes for three years. Are you changing your argument to Marion has better career numbers than Manu? Just let me keep up with your argument. So Ginobili isn't better now because he didn't have better numbers before?

Is Andrew Bynum better than Manu, he is ahead of him on your stat list and playing 3 less minutes per game so he is clearly better?

I don't know, I doubt it. He obviosuly is having a good year though, I haven't seen many of Bynum's games. We should also take into account that a lot of his positive numbers come because Bryant is out there (like +/-). Kobe is ranked higher than Bynum and is their leading player. Who is ahead of Manu for the Spurs? Noone.

And like I said, when you look at actual efficiency, Marion is still ahead of him. If Manu was clearly the more efficient player, he would play more, or starting... simple as that.

This isn't true. You just go over this point everytime. I'm assuming you disagree, but minutes do not equal how well you play. Different coaches have different minutes. Duncan sits for 1/3 of the game, how do you answer that? He isn't any good? Just the MVP over and over but he would be playing more if he was better, right? That's your fucking insane argument. It has 0 credibility.

As far as who on the Spurs gets minutes, you really need to make up your mind if everyone else sucks and Manu runs the team or if maybe he is just a cog in a well oiled machine? Problem is if you accept that he isn't a stand out over the other players, you are back peddling from your stance that the rest the team sucks and Manu carries them to titles. Quite the conundrum.

Can you find where I said the rest of the Spurs suck? I'm in no conundrum. I said Manu is great. I backed it up with evidence. I disproved every single thing you've said. This conundrum is lame.

[babylondonks 5]

Having (attempted to) read the last page, I have absolutely no idea what either of you are going on about anymore :)I think both of you continue to bring in your own evidence and ignore anything the other one says, which leads to these communication break downs. Still, an interesting read, and how could somebody with an awesome shot style such as Marion not be a better player? :PBut seriously, he's a better player than Manu.

[TheWanderer 0]

Love Gino.

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

It's like you guys work for the NBA and were put here to hype up the Suns-Spurs game tonight....and stop saying Kobe's on a bad team. They're a young team getting ready to make the leap, they're right there, approaching that ledge.

[tskillz187 0]

It's like you guys work for the NBA and were put here to hype up the Suns-Spurs game tonight....and stop saying Kobe's on a bad team. They're a young team getting ready to make the leap, they're right there, approaching that ledge.

Meh. We'll see about that.Game's not on TV either, I'm hoping Ginobs drops 60 though to end this talk.

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

Meh. We'll see about that.Game's not on TV either, I'm hoping Ginobs drops 60 though to end this talk.

What's his career high, like 40.The game is on NBAtv.

[Jadaki 0]

Yes it is what that says. Being the #1 option does not make you better than #2 or #3s on other teams. Nowhere have I ever said that #2 or #3 on teams are auto better than #1's. You can't blanket #1s as being better than #2s or #3s that's my point.I never said anything about Kobe or KG being bad. I'm saying not all #1s are better than all #2s. It's a pretty simple concept. I understand they were on bad teams, not all bad teams have no #1 but many do. Is Joe Johnson a #1? Probably not. The Hawks don't have one. The Grizz don't have one. Etc. Just because you're the best on your team doesn't mean you're better than 2nd best on other teams.

What part of Manu would not be a #1 option on any team except maybe one in the league is hard to understand? Manu is the #3 guy on the Spurs, he could possibly be #2 on a lot of teams but that's not the situation he is in.

No, this doesn't neccessarily mean anything. You don't have to start your 5 best players. Has Ginobili ever not been in at the end of a meaningful game? That's where you see who a coach thinks are his best players. You can certainly be the #1 scoring option and come off of the bench. I think it's pretty clearly the case right now for the Spurs.

I'm not disagreeing with any of that except that no one doesn't start their best player. Did you see Phil bringing MJ off the bench? The number 1 player always starts if he is healthy. I'm saying Popavich is smart of bringing him off the bench because he has a bigger advantage over the other teams bench than by starting him. Play a good player against the other teams backups and his production is going to look better than it would if he was playing against the starters more.

I know you're smart enough to understand that guards are more popular than forwards because they are flashier. Obv it's going to be harder to make the team as a guard in a guard dominated league. He will make the All-Star team because other coach's in the league will vote him in. I'm pretty confident in that.

So guards are more popular, ok. Still doesn't explain why Marion has more votes and has made made more all star teams. You go ahead be confident with your built in excuse. Look at the drop off between him at 5 and Iverson at 4, top of the second tier... seems the rest of the world agrees with me too.

You know Marion has much less real competition and you aren't trying to compare votes of guards to forwards. This is fan voting you know. Each fan probably understands the game less than you and you can't even see Manu should be an All-Star.

So the west sucks at the forward spot... anyone else want to take this one, I'm tired of proving him wrong.

I'm sorry at what point is the sub time? Wait coaches can sub whenever they want? Oh...so like other coaches can decide whether or not backups are in at certain times. Hm...Ginobili has no control over whether or not subs go in when he goes in, just when he plays. It has absoltely no bearing on who he's playing against, just who he is playing with. So don't tell me he plays against backups. You are just guessing, it's completely coach and sub-time dependent.

Well if he was a positive match up for who is on the floor, wouldn't he be on it more? I know if a guy on my bench was clearly better than the guy guarding him, I'd have him on the floor to exploit the advantage as much as possible.

Stat line when Duncan was out: 24.9ppg. Geez, you're making me look stupid. 2-2 record against Dallas, Utah, Golden St, and LAL. LAL game was without Parker and Duncan, and Parker was injured in Golden St. game. Those were the two losses... So please don't pull out his stats while Duncan is out, that'd be scary!

24ppg for a small stretch doesn't impress me. Average over 25 for a season, hell average 20 for a season... he hasn't done it.

Ginobili has only been playing significant minutes for three years. Are you changing your argument to Marion has better career numbers than Manu? Just let me keep up with your argument. So Ginobili isn't better now because he didn't have better numbers before?He doesn't have better numbers now, or in his career. You keep trying to pull out little stat bursts where Manu pulls a few games way out of his norm and act like they are his daily numbers.

I don't know, I doubt it. He obviosuly is having a good year though, I haven't seen many of Bynum's games. We should also take into account that a lot of his positive numbers come because Bryant is out there (like +/-). Kobe is ranked higher than Bynum and is their leading player. Who is ahead of Manu for the Spurs? Noone.

So you want Bynum's numbers discounted because Kobe is out there, but not Manu's when he plays with two of the best players in the league, including a guy who is argueably going to go down as one of the greatest power forwards ever... okay

This isn't true. You just go over this point everytime. I'm assuming you disagree, but minutes do not equal how well you play. Different coaches have different minutes. Duncan sits for 1/3 of the game, how do you answer that? He isn't any good? Just the MVP over and over but he would be playing more if he was better, right? That's your fucking insane argument. It has 0 credibility.

Obviously you can't read. Were talking about your efficiency stat, there are two versions of it. One for actual numbers, where I posted the stats earlier and Manu was 30th. That is for your actual performance on the court which is all that matters. The one you keep talking about is a projected stat, it's not stats that he is actually putting up just a mathmatical calculation about what he might do if he played 48 minutes, but he doesn't so that stat means exactly jack shit. Do you understand actual vs projected numbers?

[Jadaki 0]

Can you find where I said the rest of the Spurs suck? I'm in no conundrum. I said Manu is great. I backed it up with evidence. I disproved every single thing you've said. This conundrum is lame.

Lets start a list...

Parker you suck.

Uh... Duncan who?

Thank you Duncan for getting Ginobili all those easy looks. I know it's only been two games, but I think it's pretty clear that Ginobili accomodates his game for Duncan, whereas Parker's game is hugely complimented by Duncan.

Accommodates for one of the greatest players of his generation who carried your guy to titles... hilarious.

Parker bashing is welcomed whole-heartedly in this thread.

I don't think anyone that watches the games can actually say Parker is better than Manu. He's inconsistent, dribbles too much, has a shaky jumper, and doesn't distribute. Not to mention the fact that he's a defensive liability. I mean, he can't even get France to win games internationally! Parker is the single most overrated NBA player in the league.

While looking around for a post I found this from earlier this year... discussing where Yao fits in, look at the people you list ahead of Manu a few month ago, but don't now for some odd reason. You even called Josh Howard a top ten player in that post but crossed him off the list I presented earlier. I don't get why you have Barbosa on that list at all.

I think Yao fits much better with this list: Elton Brand, Tony Parker, Chris Paul, Rasheed Wallace, Rip Hamilton, Chauncey Billups, Ray Allen, Michael Redd, Paul Pierce, Luol Deng, Josh Howard, Joe Johnson, Allen Iverson, Baron Davis, Ginobili, Barbosa, Marion, Artest, Kidd, Jermaine ONealThan with this list: Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Kobe, LeBron, McGrady, Melo, Wade, Boozer, Deron Williams, Bosh, Nash, Nowitzki

I could keep going, but I found this...

It's fanboyism when I say Ginobili is the best player in the league. I say that jokingly because he's my fav player.

Holy crap, I missed you admitting this... at least you came to your senses briefly.. enjoy the season./thread

[tskillz187 0]

post

It won't let me quote your whole post for some reason, I think because of font change.I don't disagree now with anything you've quoted me on. My problem is that you say all those players I lumped Ginobs with are clearly better than him, when I don't think that's the case. Basically I think Ginobili is Josh Howard's equivalent and I think Josh Howard is vvv good. I think it's pretty clear Ginobili accomodates his game for Duncan. That doesn't mean Duncan isn't better just that Ginobili's stats would be better without Duncan. You can see that from his ppg while Duncan was down. Ginobili's went up and Parker's down. I think Parker's game is helped by Duncan whereas Ginobili takes less shots albeit easier ones and therefore ppg go down.I'm not disagreeing with your efficiency part in that quote but the minute thing. You said any good player wouldn't sit 1/3 of the game. I said Duncan sits 1/3 of the game. And you browse over that and talk about efficiency.

[tskillz187 0]

Duncan's best game of the year but we lose. Manu struggled fg% wise. Didn't see the game but it looked to me like Ginobili might have missed a last second shot? This just from staring at real time box score.

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

Btw, efficiency is a bogus stat when you're comparing players from different teams.

[Jadaki 0]

It won't let me quote your whole post for some reason, I think because of font change.I don't disagree now with anything you've quoted me on. My problem is that you say all those players I lumped Ginobs with are clearly better than him, when I don't think that's the case. Basically I think Ginobili is Josh Howard's equivalent and I think Josh Howard is vvv good. I think it's pretty clear Ginobili accomodates his game for Duncan. That doesn't mean Duncan isn't better just that Ginobili's stats would be better without Duncan. You can see that from his ppg while Duncan was down. Ginobili's went up and Parker's down. I think Parker's game is helped by Duncan whereas Ginobili takes less shots albeit easier ones and therefore ppg go down.I'm not disagreeing with your efficiency part in that quote but the minute thing. You said any good player wouldn't sit 1/3 of the game. I said Duncan sits 1/3 of the game. And you browse over that and talk about efficiency.

I didn't change that font, the forum did something weird cause I did so much quoting.Duncan has had injury problems and has had his minutes limited hasn't he. Over he career he is usually around 36-38 min per usually.Oh, and I think Manu's game might be a little limited by the style the Spurs play, there are other systems he "might" do better in, but we don't know that for sure right now.

[tskillz187 0]

Do you know what BA means? It's a stat nba.com keeps in their box score.

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

Do you know what BA means? It's a stat nba.com keeps in their box score.

Blocks Against. When the respective player gets their shot blocked.

[Jadaki 0]

Blocks Against. When the respective player gets their shot blocked.

When did they start keeping track of that?

[Poppy_Hillis 11]

When did they start keeping track of that?

I don't remember seeing it before this year, but I don't really pay attention to boxscores much.

[Jadaki 0]

I don't remember seeing it before this year, but I don't really pay attention to boxscores much.

It was listed in some playoff stats from last year, but I just blew it off because I wasn't sure what it was referring to.

[JoeyJoJo 18]

The Sports Guy just did his annual trade value column. Trade ValueThis factors in stuff like contract, age, etc., but he ranked Manu at 16, Parker at 17, Amare at 20, and Marion at 33.Just throwing that out there.

[tskillz187 0]

The Sports Guy just did his annual trade value column. Trade ValueThis factors in stuff like contract, age, etc., but he ranked Manu at 16, Parker at 17, Amare at 20, and Marion at 33.Just throwing that out there.

Well that pretty much seals it.Good link, thanks.

[Jadaki 0]

Well that pretty much seals it.Good link, thanks.

Because one jackass sportswriter says someones trade value (which is completely objective) is better than another players it seals what exactly?

[tskillz187 0]

Because one jackass sportswriter says someones trade value (which is completely objective) is better than another players it seals what exactly?

Guess I needed the SW.

[tskillz187 0]

Btw, efficiency is a bogus stat when you're comparing players from different teams.

I didn't see this the first time.Isn't it all the more impressive that Manu is the #1 player on the Spurs then? As opposed to Marion being *gasp* #3.