Did any of the 2010 posters read the OP from 2008? This was not a debate over who is better between Ginobili and McGrady. It simply stated that our team (as currently constructed, in 2008) didn't have a chance of winning an NBA title if Manu was better than Tracy. The Spurs were having trouble winning it with the best PF of all time, a finals MVP point guard, a much better supporting cast, and Ginobili. Did you just post in the first thread you found with Manu and Tmac in the title?
I don't think you can say that just because the Spurs didn't win it, we would have no chance to win it. The Spurs were contenders. They had their chance, but sometimes things just don't work out. If Ginobili was a better player than McGrady, its reasonable to think he'd have increased our chances of winning a championship. That's all you ask for. There are no guarantees.
Take both Mcgrady and Ginobili out of the equation. Don't you think the Spurs had a considerably better roster at the time? We may have done well in the regular season but everyone knew that our huge holes offensively would prove troublesome when we faced the stiffer competition in the playoffs. Sure, it's reasonable that a better overall player could make a team better overall but if Duncan is better than Yao and Ginobili is better than McGrady and Parker is much better than any 3rd option and their bench is much better and they lose what does that say about our chances? I just didn't think a McGrady/Yao team could work unless McGrady was a special player,more special than Ginobili. I think I was right, at least in that regard...It didn't work.
Alright, let's compare Ginobili in games he started to McGrady since the 2004/2005 season (when McGrady joined the Rockets -- I don't care about his Orlando days). I'll even be charitable and discard the meaningless minutes McGrady played this season from the data: -------------- PER 36 MINUTES ------------- G MPG PTS AST REB STL BLK TOV TS% RTG T-Mac 297 37.3 22.3 5.5 5.4 1.3 0.6 2.5 .507 15.7 Manu 143 29.8 19.8 4.8 5.2 1.9 0.4 2.7 .600 16.0 McGrady does two things very well compared to Ginobili. He played more minutes for his team, and despite significantly more touches (leading to more shot attempts/assists) he's a low turnover guy. For what they do while they are on the floor, Ginobili compares pretty favorably, I'd say. Dominates the ball less, but is way more efficient (as indicated by their respective true shooting%).
ok I havent read the whole thread but let me guess, am I the ONLY 1 that would pick prime Gino over Prime Tmac? Reason being attitude,defense,shooting %,heart,hustle,and I believe Gino would have been more beloved here instead of Tmac, also I believe in curses and I think the tmac/vince carter curse is real just like the juwon howard curse. I know Tmac was breathtaking in 2003 but Gino was to busy winning a championship instead of being a quitter on the Magic. /thread
Manu is a better defender too. The stats you pulled up are great, but you're trying to prove a point to someone that admitted they're a Tracy only fan. It's a lose lose situation.
T-Mac might be the better individual talent but there's no question that Manu's the better team asset. In addition the talent you get from T-Mac comes with a ton of assorted baggage--willingness to work, share the ball, a diva complex, etc. Hands down, you choose Manu.
no if he brought up kobe are lebron, then i would say they were a better player. but this is freakin manu ginobli who gets more credit for being a role player on a championship team than a franchise player who is trying to take his team all the way because he has too.
championships > first round exits heroes > losers When the Rockets won their championships, we didn't no stinking scoring champion, we got REAL CHAMPIONS.
+ best post in this entire thread. + true Rockets fan The only Orlando Magic references to the Rockets is when we swept their ass in 4 to win our 2nd straight championship.
