Pop Culture, Vol. 9

by

We’ve shied away from the traditional recaps you can find all over the interwebs, but we still have a few thoughts after each game. For more as they happen, be sure to follow 48MoH on Twitter. You’ll find our post-game grades in emoji form there. For real.

Trevor Zickgraf:

He was banged up last season, he had a dreadful summer playing for Team France at Eurobasket. Tony Parker had even the most levelheaded of us worried. At 33, he was entering his 15th season. Counting the postseason, that’s more than 1200 games and 40,000 minutes played. It was worth asking whether the wheels were falling off. For Tony Parker the engine of the Spurs offense, the answer is yes. For top five point guard Tony Parker, the answer is again yes. For Tony Parker, important part of the NBA championship caliber team, the answer is no.

On the surface, things don’t look very good for Parker. His assists, rebounds and Player Efficiency Rating are at career lows and his points are the lowest since his rookie year. The concern for Parker heading into the season was that his legs were shot. His field goal percentage was shockingly low at Eurobasket following a playoff series against the Los Angeles Clippers where he shot 36 percent and looked like he had ankle weights strapped on. Then the Spurs were unable to re-sign Cory Joseph and the point guard spot looked like a weakness heading into the season.

This is the obligatory only nine games disclaimer, but the concerns over Parker have been exaggerated. So far he’s shooting the second highest he’s ever shot from the field, just a tick below his career high of 55 percent. More importantly, he’s still getting into the paint and converting a close to 60 percent clip.

Shotchart_1447653204136

Two things should stand out here. One, the fact that the majority of Parker’s shots (and makes) have come in the paint. Second, the fact that his mid-range jumper has been on point so far. This season, Parker is taking three less attempts per game, which isn’t surprising because of Kawhi Leonard’s increased usage and the presence of LaMarcus Aldridge. His role has shifted and it’s probably come at the right time in his career. Three seasons ago, Parker played at an MVP level. Two seasons ago he was slightly less great, but still All-Star good. Last year was still pretty good, but he was clearly banged up. To ask him to be the guy that makes things go again this season, in his 15th year, would’ve been unfair, just a bad idea, or both. Just like Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili before him, Parker’s role has been retooled and he’s finding ways to maximize his touches.

It’s still a work in progress. For starters, Parker’s assist to turnover ratio is only 1.63 and he’s averaging the same amount turnovers as last year but with a lower usage rate. He’s also not getting to the free throw line as much. He’s making about half as many trips to the line as his career average, though it’s about the same as last year. Any combination of cutting down his turnovers and raising his trips to the free throw line is obviously going to help his overall play, but he seems to be on the right path. Most importantly, he looks healthier now than he did since around December of 2014. Leonard and Aldridge have made it okay for Parker to pick his spots, play less minutes and give his body more of a rest. That’s a recipe for good third offensive option come playoff time.

All stats provided by NBA.com/stats and ESPN.com

  • jon walters

    The other Spur fanatic here at my work and I agree, the “gutsy, correct, and will never happen” move of the offseason would have been to trade Parker and pony up the dough for Joseph. It’s not that Joseph’s great play in Toronto is a shock, Manu among others said that Joseph had been the best guard on the team for the first half of last season. And it wasn’t that he slowed down in the second half, his minutes just disappeared. I like Parker as a person, but as a player I can’t say I have ever been enamored. I will always think the Spurs greatness has been due to Manu and Tim. But i get how Parker is perceived as equally important, I just don’t agree. Great article by Ric Bucher after the 2014 championship that fundamentally took that stance, that among the front office it was Duncan and Ginobili who had been the keys to their successful run.

  • Greg Phillips

    You don’t think Parker was as important as Tim and Manu? This annoys me to no end with other Spurs fans. He was the the MVP of the playoffs and the Finals in 2013 (the same FInals Ginobili single-handedly blew), when we were 27 seconds away from a ring. He was the MVP of the postseason the year before, when we were a game away from the Finals. And he was the MVP through the first three rounds in 2014, prior to the Finals against Miami (where he still led us in scoring and was second in assists, behind Diaw). Oh, he was also our playoff/Finals MVP 2007. Not to mention that he has been our regular season engine for the last 5-6 seasons.

    I understand Parker isn’t Tim, but you don’t think he’s as important as Manu? I’ll never understand that stance among Spurs fans. One bad season, and Parker as the engine of the Spurs in their recent run is out the window. TP is by the Spurs of the Big 3: criminally underrated

  • jon walters

    Read the article by Ric Bucher, its says what I have thought since 2005. BTW, in the clinching game in 2003, Parker didn’t even play in the second half. In 2005, Parker scored 2 points in the second half of game 7, Manu should have been the MVP. In 2007, Parker was the MVP and deserved it. But Manu scored 13 points in the final quarter of the clinching game, and Pop still went to him in all closing situations. Manu had the best +/- in the 2014 playoffs, Parker I believe wasn’t in the top three. Manu led the Spurs back from a 22-6 defecit in game 5. Buford said after the game that if not for Manu they would have headed back to Miami with the Heat having all the mojo. Manu makes his teammates better, its why even today the Spur bench is so effective. Here’s the link to the article, I hope you can open it up. If not, it’s called “With Flair for the Dramatic, Manu Ginobili Keeps Spurs on Steady Path of Success”. Yes, he does. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2099848-with-flair-for-dramatic-manu-ginobili-keeps-spurs-on-steady-path-of-success#articles/2099848-with-flair-for-dramatic-manu-ginobili-keeps-spurs-on-steady-path-of-success

  • Tyler

    From a sheer value perspective, it wouldn’t have made sense to move TP - you weren’t going to get dollar for dollar value over the summer, especially considering how he played at the end of last season and the numbers he put up for France. If anything you would have received .50 on the dollar and you’d have to find a way to take back less salary than you send out. That would be the only way you could accommodate resigning CoJo and carving out enough space for LMA (CoJo’s rights had to be renounced in order to sign LMA.) All in all, it would have required some serious cap gymnastics.

  • jon walters

    I’m sure you are correct. And the nice thing is that Parker is actually making passes this year that I’ve never seen him make in the past. Catch the ball, move the ball. It’s like he finally gets that ball movement is as important as trying to create something individually everytime he touches it. I think the signs are very hopeful. Maybe he’s seen “The Beautiful Game” and noticed how little he is on it! Just kidding, I think Parker has grown up in his time with the Spurs. Just never liked his habit of dominating the ball. It’s been a 12 year struggle with Pop, being aggressive vs. moving the ball and finding that middle ground.

  • Tyler

    I wouldn’t say TP dominated the ball, certainly not like the Carmelo, Chris Paul, Lebron, Westbrook, or Durant’s of the basketball world. The ball was in his hands a lot simply because a.) he’s a PG and b.) most importantly, he was an elite player for good 4-5 years.

    Also, TP was an integral part of “The Beautiful Game”; it certainly didn’t occur in spite of him. I think what too many forget is you need someone to threaten and collapse the defense initially; to make 2 guys cover 1 - that’s what gets the defense scrambling in the first place. Passing just for passing sake doesn’t get you anywhere. For a long time, TP was the creative force that set the wheel in motion.

    For example take hockey assists per game - TP was 5th in 13/14 and 7th in 14/15 (and 3rd so far this year). If the data had gone back farther, my guess is he was at or near the top along with the other elite PG’s.

  • jon walters

    Don’t forget my favorite ball stopper, Kobe! I am amazed and stand corrected if Parker’s hockey assists were really that high. Would you know where Manu ranks in hockey assists? Because I always thought he was the hockey assist king of the league. No, Parker wasn’t the ball stopper like those other guys. But he was guilty of too many possessions were it stuck in his hands. When Pop gets on his case, which has happened with regularity over the years, that is always the issue. You can see in Pop’s body language that he is telling Parker to move the gd ball. With Manu he gets totally exasperated, as in why Manu can’t you just make the simple play? But I think at some point Pop realized that Manu was going to be Manu, whereas with Parker he always thought it was a fixable problem (to move the ball better).

  • Tyler

    Manu was 43 in 13/14 and 17 in 14/15. All stats off nba.com player tracking. Keep in mind these are per game, and not adjusted for pace or minutes played, which would probably make both TP and Manu look even better really.

  • Greg Phillips

    Yeah, you’re cherry picking quite a few moments to support your argument here. The 2003 Finals, Parker was 21 years old. Do you know what Ginobili was doing for the Spurs at 21? Playing in Italy, not winning an NBA championship. Also, you keep bringing up the 2014 Finals. Do you know where the Spurs are in 2014 without Parker? Knocked out in the first round by the Mavs. In regards to Manu’s +/-, it should be higher than Parker’s, as he comes off of the bench and plays the lion’s share of his minutes against the opponent’s second unit. He also hasn’t drawn the opposing team’s best perimeter defender in about 7 years. That honor has gone to Parker (OKC-Sefalosha, MIA-LeBron, POR-Batum, LAC-Paul, and so on). And congrats to Manu leading the Spurs back in game 5 (I would argue it was more Kawhi, be that’s splitting hairs and doesn’t really matter), that’s one observation in an ocean of samples. The reality is, Parker has been the heart and soul of the Spurs’ offense in it’s Golden Age (the beautiful game era). That you fail to see this, and that you seem to see Parker as some sort of ball-stopping iso player, really tells me all I need to know, which is that you haven’t had a good grasp on the Spurs offensive strategy in quite some time. As my friend below pointed out with the hockey assists statistic, the idea that Parker has been anything other than the vital catalyst for the league’s best offense is objectively wrong. But I’m not going to spend any more time trying to convince you of his value, as your notion of Parker seem to be based off of the 21 year old PG that was benched in the 2003 Finals, and that doesn’t seem likely to change at this point in his career.

  • jon walters

    I will only say again that I agree with the Ric Butcher article, and that I have looked at the Spurs having two offenses. One is based on ball and man movement, the other based on Parker creating. Both have been necessary. PJ Carlissimo has said that when Ginobili comes into games movement automatically gets better. Why should that be if the engine (Parker) had been ensuring that movement wasn’t happening already?

  • Greg Phillips

    If PJ’s assertion is true (I don’t think it its, but I’ll humor it), that wouldn’t be all that strange now, would it? You would expect ball movement and man movement to increase when the one player you have capable of breaking down the defense is off the floor-you don’t really have any other options, do you? Parker has always made life easier for other players with his penetration and ability to draw two defenders. With him off of the floor and Ginobili on it, man and ball movement would have to increase precisely because he is incapable of offering what Parker offers. Relying on man and ball movement to win games will only get you so far. You need a guy like Parker. Do you think it’s a coincidence that, despite playing brilliant team basketball, the Spurs couldn’t even escape the 1st round of the playoffs without Parker at his best?

    But, again, I disagree with PJ anyway (and the hockey assist statistic would indicate he’s wrong). When the Spurs offense is at it’s best, it all starts with Parker running the high pick and roll.

    As a final point, we haven’t mentioned another crucial variable: AST/TO ratio. Parker has always taken better care of the ball than Ginobili.

  • jon walters

    More cherry picking from me. Two quotes from Pop. 1) “Manu wins games in more ways than anyone I’ve ever coached.” 2) “No Manu, no chance.” The Spurs have only lost twice in the first round, once when Manu didn’t play and the other time when he missed a game and played with a broken arm against Memphis. If you want to argue that Parker has been a lot more durable, I would not disagree. Now I don’t pretend to know all the factors involved, but many analytic writers point to the Wins
    Above Replacement as THE barometer for a player’s worth. Given that, here’s the following from Dave Pelton, who in rating Parker and Ginobili as the second best guard tandem in the last thirty years, wrote this:

    The longest-running tandem on this list, Parker and Ginobili have only occasionally started together because Ginobili typically comes off the bench. Still, this is also the most balanced duo, with Ginobili leading Parker in WARP (123.1 to 81.5). There’s a reasonable chance both Spurs guards end up in the Hall of Fame.
    Manu doesn’t have just a better WARP in his career, it’s not even close.

  • jon walters

    If it’s any consolation, I have written earlier that I thought Parker was the key to the Spurs chances this year. He doesn’t need to be great, but he needs to be good. unlike last year when he was awful (ESPN’s real plus minus had him as the 376th most effectice player in the league). And the signs are very hopeful, he has been solid and getting better. But you are right, you’ll never convince me that he has been more important than Manu. I just checked the Rowland Ratings (another analytic website), and over the last eight years Manu had the better rating six times, Parker twice. It might not mean much, but you certainly can’t glean from these analytics that Parker is the better player. You can say the analytics are crap, but I don’t think that’s a winning argument.

  • Greg Phillips

    I don’t think advanced analytics are crap, but I don’t think they are a catch all either. For example, Parker’s biggest asset to the Spurs in the last 6-7 seasons has been is ability to break down a defense. This is most accurately measured by hockey statistics, which isn’t considered by the most common catch all advanced stats. Ginobilis advanced stats are also bolstered by the fact he’s a better rebounder (which is natural, seeing as he has 4 inches on Parker and is a 2 guard). Does his status as a slightly better rebounder come close to matching the impact of Parker’s dribble penetration? Of course not, but rebounding is measured in stats like PER.

    I think it really boils down to this. Ginobili was atrocious in 2012-2013. It’s a team game, but I don’t think it would be a stretch to say that he almost single-handedly cost the Spurs the Finals that year. However, despite his horrendous play, the Spurs were 28 seconds away from winning the whole damn thing. Why? Because Parker was playing well. Now look at last year. Relative to his last 5-6 seasons, Ginobili was playing pretty well. But it was Parker’s turn to be atrocious last year, and we all know how that ended.

    Was there a point in their careers when Manu was the more valuable of the pair? Of course. Has their value to the team been close since 2010? Not at all. Your arguing that a top 6th man has been more valuable to his team than one of the top 2-3 PGs over the last 5-6 seasons. That’s a strange hill to die on.

    FWIW, Manu himself has readily conceded that Parker has been the focal point of the team since 2010, so I’m really not sure why this is even a conversation. Maybe race or nationality? Who knows.

  • jon walters

    I will once again refer you to the Bucher article, written after the 2014 championship, where he said Spurs personnel thinks Parker is underrated as far as point guard standing in the league, but overrated as far as importance to the team. Yes, Parker has been the leading scorer and assist man on the team the last 6 or 7 years. Yes, his offense has been needed. And yes, he has played a lot more and been very durable. But I think the analytics quantifies what used to be called the intangibles, and Manu has had more intangibles than Parker. For instance, I read once (but have no idea from where) that the Spurs have shot much better from the field when he is in the game for his career (something like 47%) compared to when he is not (43% I believe). That is significant. Yes, Manu was horrible in the 2012-13 playoffs. Yes, he turns the ball over too much. But it isn’t just an accident that he has THE BEST winning percentage of any player currently playing, higher than either Duncan and Parker. Race? Geez, I hope not. Argentinian? I’m not sure I spelled that right.

  • jon walters

    Another cheery pick you will like and I fully agree with. Gary Neal was asked what made the Spurs so successful, and he replied, “The organization and Pop are all great, but to me it all comes down to the Big 3.” I agree, once they leave the true greatness of the Spurs will be no more. Also, watching Steph Curry last night reminded me of one special skill Parker has, he’s been the best finisher around. Tony hardly ever misses a driving shot or layup, and they are not often easy shots. Amazing touch around the rim.