Sportsline's top 20 point guards: Bibby in at 7

DaMan

Starter
http://www.sportsline.com/nba/story/9671043

7. Mike Bibby, Sacramento: It will be interesting to see how his role changes under a new coach. Rick Adelman got a lot out of Bibby, but there has always been a sense he can do more. He's nearly 20 pounds lighter than he was at the end of last season and hopes to have increased quickness.

Yea, the main question is how will Mike do under the new Coach will he force him to be more of a point guard and play more D or will they just let him play like a POINTS guard and let him play off the ball.
 
I never noticed how big Steve Nash's head was. I think Bibby will be fine.

Thanks for the link.
 
Jason Terry was much better than what the ranking suggests, I dont get it how Stephon marbury is up there in top 10. IMO Jason Terry is top 5
 
sure he does. he's got a couple of rings. mike doesn't...


eh... same could be said for lots of players with rings. i have trouble believing he would have them if it weren't for timmy and manu at his side. still, parker has alot of game, but doesn't seem to be the kinda player that can carry a team on his back. i'd still take mike, but maybe i'm bias since i'm high on the guy.
 
eh... same could be said for lots of players with rings. i have trouble believing he would have them if it weren't for timmy and manu at his side. still, parker has alot of game, but doesn't seem to be the kinda player that can carry a team on his back. i'd still take mike, but maybe i'm bias since i'm high on the guy.

he definitely did in the 2006 nba playoffs. he tore up the kings repeatedly, if my memory serves me properly...
 
Last edited:
he definitely did in the 2006 nba playoffs. he tore up the kings repeatedly, if my memory serves me properly...

probably his best performance ever in the play offs, the guy has never really shown up in the play offs. Considering how bad Duncan was playing, Parke probably kept the Kings from making a bigger run on SA.
 
Tony Parker's advantage is that he is quick as hell. he would have ZERO rings if it wasn't for Duncan and Manu. I think Bibby is better, except for the quickness.
 
How much does Tony Parker pay you to be his publicist?

what are you going on about?

tony parker first round playoff statistics 2006:

ppg: 22.2
apg: 4.7
rpg: 3.5
spg: 1.0
fg%: .510
ft%: .886
3p%: .333

does this speak volumes to you? it certainly does to me. he tore up the kings. so what? i don't need to be tony parker's publicist to point out how well he played...
 
what are you going on about?

tony parker first round playoff statistics 2006:

ppg: 22.2
apg: 4.7
rpg: 3.5
spg: 1.0
fg%: .510
ft%: .886
3p%: .333

does this speak volumes to you? it certainly does to me. he tore up the kings. so what? i don't need to be tony parker's publicist to point out how well he played...

That's what not having a shotblocker at the rim does to you. :mad:
 
I have been far from a Parker jocker over the eyars -- have not believed the early hype. That said the dude shot 19ppg on 55% from the field last year, as a POINT GUARD, and for a title contender, and that clearly moved him well ahead of anybody in that general scoring range, Bibby included. Besides, he's probably got a much hotter girl. ;)

As for Bibby's potential, I like Meija as a sportwriter, but wonder if he knows that under Rick Bibby's scoring has increased every year for the last 5 years, with the last 4 being consecutive career highs. Not really sure how much more there is to bleed out of that stone, although do think that maybe the scoring/passing mix might alter a bit this year (maybe, remember Muss's last PG was some dude named Arenas, not exactly a pass first guy).
 
I remember we had this same discussion last year, and I had said that Tony was better than Michael, and still think that(I know Mr. Slim Citrus isnt the biggest TP fan.:D) Now...that being said, there are alot of intangables that will be in play this year with one Michael Bibby. His losing 20 pounds could be an advantage or a disadvantage, depending on how he utilizes his recovered quickness from a few years ago...is he using it to get a quicker step on defense, which would be most valuable?? It has yet to be seen...defense...and Mr. Bibby, lighter in the pants or not. At the least, I think we can expect a definete quicker first step with the ball, and getting open off the ball...THAT will be nice. I cant wait to see this...because a better Bibby= a MUCH improved Kings offense.
 
I think Steve Nash is 20 pounds lighter without all that Surf City hair...
I used to think he might look better without all that hair....boy, was I ever wrong. :eek: No change in hairstyle is gonna help much.

Great player and seems like a really great guy, but not attractive.
 
I have been far from a Parker jocker over the eyars -- have not believed the early hype. That said the dude shot 19ppg on 55% from the field last year, as a POINT GUARD, and for a title contender, and that clearly moved him well ahead of anybody in that general scoring range,quote]

I think he lead the league in points in the paint as well or is one among the leaders. Parker did come a long way to claim that all star spot and he deserved it atleast on the offensive end. On defense he gets the benefit of playing with two 7 footers behind him and a great defensive scheme and a coach who ensures that all the players are playing within the scheme.
 
Put Bibby on a team stacked like the Spurs are and this conversation would be completely the other way around.

He's been on one stacked like the Spurs team, and put up more mdoest numbers.

In any case, I don't think they are on different planes necessarily, but Parker clearly was more impressive last year -- I can't recall having seen a PG have such a remarkable season scoring inside.
 
Put Bibby on a team stacked like the Spurs are and this conversation would be completely the other way around.

That we will never know, at the same time I can also say that "Put Parker on the 2002 kings team and they would have won the ring that year"

"Put Parker on the Kings in 2006 and the kings would have reached the WCF"
 
That we will never know, at the same time I can also say that "Put Parker on the 2002 kings team and they would have won the ring that year"

"Put Parker on the Kings in 2006 and the kings would have reached the WCF"


And now you have crossed back over.
 
Remember the "top small-forward" thread?

Remember how we discussed how stacked that group was with talent?

.
.
.
.
.
The Point guard position in today's NBA sure is effin pathetic.
 
Back
Top