Commenting on the difficulty Boston had with Atlanta, Kevin Garnett remarked that he wished people realized that “regular season isregular and playoffs is playoffs.”
KG was trying to emphasize the fact that the stakes are higher and the competition is more fierce.
Well, a game 7 is the pinnacle.
The San Antonio Spurs have played in two game 7’s.
Having won the NBA championship in 7 games versus the Detroit Pistons in 2005, they know what it takes.
That’s why I’ll take the Spurs tonight.
In both games, San Antonio was led by Tim Duncan (the greatest power forward of all-time) and Manu Ginobili (one of the greatest winners the game has ever known).
Duncan and Hornets power forward David West will get theirs tonight but I think the game will be decided by Chris Paul and Manu Ginobili.
Paul has been brilliant in the playoffs so far but he and the Hornets haven’t really been pushed to the brink. They breezed through the first round series with the Mavericks and every game in this series has been won by 10 points or more, with the home team emerging as the victor.
Tonight’s game 7 will be played on New Orleans’ homecourt but the Spurs won’t be blown out.
Each possession will be critical.
Whichever players controls the game from the guard position, will lead his team to victory.
Chris Paul has emerged as the best point guard in the game in these playoffs but Ginobili has hit countless clutch baskets in the most pressure-packed situations.
My money is on Manu.
May 19th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Hoffman on Manu Ginobili:
“One of the greatest winners the game has ever known.”
Come on. That’s a stretch and a half, you don’t think?
Manu Ginobili could have ended up on the Clippers and wouldn’t have won anything.
And any Spurs fan will tell you he almost NEVER comes through with a shot in the clutch. That’s just not him.
He’s a good player– a very dynamic one who can impact the game in many ways.
But “One of the greatest winners the game has ever known.”
A little crazy.
May 19th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
“One of the greatest bald spots the game has ever known”
Corrected for truth
May 19th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Manu won the Euroleague 2000-01 Finals MVP award and the 2001 League Championship.
He won the gold medal during the 2004 Olympics.
Three NBA championships.
Let me put this way, let’s say X, Train, and I are playing in a round robin tournament and we’re captains and get to draft out teams.
Let’s assume the all-world talents (Kobe, LeBron, Duncan, KG) are taken.
You can take Dwyane Wade, Allen Iverson, Chris Paul, Amare Stoudemire, Rasheed Wallace etc., etc.
Those guys have the individual skills and the notiriety.
I’ll take Ginobili.
We’ll see who wins.
May 19th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
look, I’m a big Manu fan. I think he’s tremendously underrated (the fact that he was left off the All-Star team despite being probably one of the top 10 players in the league this year was unforgivable).
However, to call him “one of the greatest winners the game has ever known” is overdoing it. That’s hallowed ground right there. Statements like that are reserved for guys like Russell, MJ, Duncan, Magic, Bird, etc. Manu is a good player, but he’s not that kind of player. He’s not a guy that you can stick on a bad team and immediately improve them by 15 wins.
May 20th, 2008 at 9:04 am
X
“He’s not a guy that you can stick on a bad team and immediately improve them by 15 wins.”
I’m not so sure about that.
It’s no coincidence that he’s won everywhere he’s been. He’s a guy that’s capable of getting 25 points a night. He’s clutch. He plays good defense and he’s a playmaker.
What more can you want?
May 20th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
I think in 10 years we’re going to remember Manu much like we remember Kevin Johnson. Great player? Absolutely. Winner? Definitely. Front man on a title contender? No. One of the greatest winners of all time? Definitely not. As good as KJ was, there is no doubt that Barkley was the star of that Finals team. Barkley was the superstar, Johnson just wasn’t at the same level. Similarly, as good as Manu is, there’s no doubt that Duncan is the engine that makes the Spurs run.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Well put, X.
He’s good. But let’s be real. He has two NBA rings. One of them he earned by being a factor, and the other he got by simply being on the roster.
If the Spurs win this year, no doubt Manu will have deservedly added another ring.
But until that happens, he is what he is. A dynamic player who flourishes in his unique role on a superstar-led veteran team. He’s not the straw that stirs the drink.
And as for what Manu accomplished outside of the U.S., I toss all of that out. That’s a whole different game out there. Don’t even bring up 2004. The U.S. quit giving a shit about the Olympics a long time ago. Had we sent our good players, and had we more than just a few weeks to prepare, we would have beaten Argentina by 50 points. International ball is a joke. The best players outside of the U.S. are guys who were nobodies in the U.S. Anthony Parker tore it up with Maccabi Tel-Aviv, as did Khalid El-Amin at one point.
But that’s a whole other subject.
Anyhow, I judge Manu by what he has done in the NBA. And that’s won one title. Would you call Rip Hamilton one of the all-time great winners? He’s just as much of a winner–if not more– than Manu.
Manu is simply a guy who works incredibly hard in a lazy league. Effort is all it takes to be good in today’s league. 20 years ago there was a Manu Ginobili, and his name was Sarunas Marciulonis. Very similar player. Marciulonis in today’s league would be a borderline all-star.
Manu is good, and I like him, but we have to keep it in context.
And as far as the other players mentioned–guys like Joe Johnson– those guys are overrated. Yeah, Manu is every bit as good, if not better than Joe Johnson. But that’s not saying a whole lot. Joe Johnson ten years ago existed in the form of Isiah Rider. There will always be this prototype of player, and he will always be overrated. I’d take Manu over most of these guys.
I like the KJ comparion. Really good player who became “great” thanks to how much people liked him. But never an elite talent.
Manu has to thank Popovich for reining him in. If Manu was allowed to play his reckless ball, forget it. Put Manu on the Nuggets and give him 40 minutes per game. He’ll average 25 points on 43% shooting and put up 5 turnovers per game. He’ll also get hurt all the time.
Pop has played this man no more than 31 minutes per game in any season. As a matter of fact, this year, at age 30, was the first time Manu has averaged 30 minutes per game.
Good player. But let’s tone it down a bit. He has career averages of 14.7 points, 4 reb, 3.6 ast, 1.5 stl.
Telling you, he’s Sarunas Marciulonis all over again. Except he’s on a good team.
May 20th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
I can’t believe you two are mentioning KJ and Ginobili in the same sentence!
May 20th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Yeah, KJ was a helluva lot better!
May 21st, 2008 at 9:35 am
“Yeah, KJ was a helluva lot better!” - A-Train
You’re crazy my friend.
I’m not going to use the rings argument because KJ played in MJ’s era but Ginobili is a winner…pure and simple.
Need a clutch basket, he’s your guy.
Need a clutch steal, he’s your guy.
As great as Tim Duncan is, he’s not getting it done without Manu.
May 21st, 2008 at 11:24 am
Except that Duncan has “gotten it done” twice without Manu (we’re not going to count Manu’s rookie year, when he clearly wasn’t a huge factor). Duncan is the driving force on this team. It’s his threat on the low block that gives the team balance and it’s his superb defense that makes the Spurs a dominant defensive team. You ask every coach, exec and scout in the NBA who they’d rather have and every single one of them would take Duncan over Ginobili. Duncan is “one of the greatest winners the game has ever known”, Ginobili is a good player on a good team.
All you keep saying is “he’s a winner”, but where’s the proof that he’s been anything more than lucky to land on the team he did? What makes him any more of a winner than Tayshaun Prince? Prince’s college teams had a 97-39 record, he has a championship ring, and he’s never missed the conference finals. Is Prince one of the greatest winners of all time? No, not a chance. He’s a very good player who ended up on a very good team.
May 21st, 2008 at 11:42 am
Hoff, you like Manu– we get it. LOL.
But X is right. We’re not saying Manu isn’t good. He’s just no more this great winner than, say, Tayshaun Prince is.
And really, come on, you can’t be serious saying Manu is better than KJ.
KJ probably won’t make the Hall of Fame, but man, had he just one more really good year, or had he won a ring or award, he’d be getting nominated right now. He was good.
Like Stephon Marbury at his best minus all of the negatives.
I watch so many Spurs games because my father watches them all. He’s Argentine and he follows Manu religiously. Trust me, Manu is not a clutch player. He can go through spurts where he takes over the game. But the man almost never takes and makes the last shot.