Man this guy is awesome. I don't see how other people are not talking about him. He is going to be one of the if not THE best point guard in the NBA in the future. People seem to forget that Kwame Brown is older than him and Griffin is just two weeks younger. He makes alot of mistakes but that comes with his age. What do you think of him?
i think Parker will be a great player, he is a verry good pointguard especially when you look at his age. he is unbelievble fast. His shot selection could be better, but like you said he is verry young. he will be great. But not for the Spurs if they really want to go after Kidd this year.
No disrespect to Kidd, but the Spurs would be making a big mistake to replace a position that is already more than solid. Throw in the 10 year age difference as well. They should be going after either a scorer, a PF/C, ora PF/C that can score.
Being a point guard is easy when you have Tim Duncan in the post. He's solid, but doesn't really stand out in any area of his game. Right now, he's Kenny Smith with some penetration ability. Of course, I'd LOVE to pair him up with Steve Francis.
Kenny could shoot better than Parker, but Parker has more 'nads than KS ever did (I cannot believe I said that about a Frenchman...)
the reason i like parker so much, is because he is so fast. and so young. and the pointguard position is the hardest for a young player. ofcourse he has duncan on his team and that makes it easier. But he wil be great
So, just like most problems in the world, it's a WOMAN'S fault that Tony Parker gets the word "French" attached to him.
I think he is fairly overrated. PGs on the Spurs, T-Tups or Lakers have the easiest jobs in the NBA. Put Parker on a team where he had to be the guy and I don't think he would be special at all. Maybe eventually, but not now. As for Kidd, I agree he might not be the best fit for the Spurs but for a different reason. He isn't a great shooter. Good and much improved, yes, but the Spurs should focus on 2/3s who are dead eyes and can ball. Think god they didn't get Ray Allen for instance. Payton, though not a 2, would be awefully scary in a Spurs uni too--more so than Kidd IMO.
I'm going to have to agree with Desert Scar here. Parker is VERY Overrated. He's right on the money when he says It's a fairly easy task to run the Lakers, Wolves and Spurs. It's ridiculous how much props Parke gets.
Couldn't agree more. I mean how hard is it to throw the ball to Duncan? The little French God is good, but I am getting tired of listening to all this BS about how he is already top 7 or whatever. Same goes for Bibby. Put them on a team like the Warriors, or Clippers and they would completely embarass themselves.
You guys beat me to it: I think Parker is overrated as well. I seriously doubt he'll ever be the best freakin' point guard in the league. I think he's one of those guys who may be a "fringe all-star." You know, he makes it just one or two times later in his career, but no one ever really thinks of him as an all-star. I feel the same way about Mobley.
Parker is great. He is only like 21 years old. I like him. He's not the very acrobatic or strong, but he is pretty fast. He is kinda inconsistent. But when he scores more than 20 points a game, the Spurs have been undefeated. It would be a mistake if they signed Kidd. Well if they had Kidd...they would have three very valuable players. But I don't think that would be a good idea. The Spurs should get a new center. They probably will. Anyways, Tony Parker is good.
Overrated... But Kidd isn't much of an upgrade over Parker, if you consider the Spurs offense over the last 6 years. SA doesn't need to pay max money to a PG who dumps it into Duncan. Moreover, Kidd doesn't really function that great away from the ball, and isn't that much of a spot-up shooter. Gary Payton would be a better choice. SA needs more scoring punch, as opposed to a distributor in an offense like theirs.
I like him mainly because of his maturity at such a young age. Just saying anyone can play with a Duncan type player is a bit disrespectful. Look at the difference between Sam-I-Am and Kenny Smith, both played with Hakeem but only one was/is really good. It wasn't Duncan that was taking to GP in the playoffs. Please get this nonsense of put him on a team like the Grizzlies, Warriors, etc. Unless the person has a good front court, no PG will lead a team to ****. Francis won't, Marbury won't, GP won't, Kidd won't, etc...... The Spurs consist of one of the two MVP candidates(KG being the other), and a bunch of role players with Parker. Not saying Parker is the next Isiah, but he has a better understanding of the team game than the other "young" PGs. That being said, as someone has already mentioned Kidd wouldn't be as good a fit with the Spurs as he is with Nets....GP would be the better decision. Again, he's 34. Instead of a PG, they should be looking for another big man that would help out Duncan next year.
Tony Parker is not overrated. He's a very impressive young and mature PG. Playing with a big man is no easy task. Ask Steve Francis.
You don't spend $$$$ on Kidd and have him "dump it into Duncan". If the Spurs DO get Kidd, you think, maybe, the offense might just change?? Already Pop is beginning to let loose the reigns abit and let them get some transition going; scoring over 100 pts/game is becoming routine; last couple of years that has been unheard of. After this season only two players will remain on the Spurs since the '01 playoffs when the Lakers throttled the Spurs and Pop said right after the last game, "we have to get younger & more athletic".
