Parker vs Hill

[G-Dawgg]

I'm curious what everybody's opinions are. Who is a better player? Personally, I think Parker is a better jump shooter and more proficient at running the Spurs offense, but I feel Hill is a better all-around player. Hill looks WAY better than Parker when he was a 2nd year player. Hill also plays BOTH sides of the ball very well and not just the offensive side. while Parker has become too much of a one dimensional scoring point guard..

Don't get me wrong, I love Tony Parker, he can be a terror offensively, but I think the Spurs have to take the leadership role from Parker and give it to Hill... Hill is the Future for the Spurs.

What are everybody else's thoughts on this?

[AussieFanKurt]

Hill is definitely the future
I want to see him starting and when Parker comes back, I don't know.
Maybe its time to rebuild and Parker could be bait? I don't know

[Cane]

Hill struggles to make plays and struggles at passing the ball. He is going to be part of the Spurs future but unless he's got Manu or Parker alongside with him; the Spurs won't have a legitimate playmaker. As awesome as Hill was last night against OKC as he set a new career high scoring wise; he had zero assists. Imo Tim Duncan's drop in offensive production has a lot to do with a lack of Tony Parker since those two guys have the most chemistry with eachother and Hill just doesn't create or make plays like those guys have done (winning championships together kind of does that for 'em).

He's been making huge improvements in the other facets of his game but imo passing and creating plays is one of the more difficult areas to improve in. Like rebounding its almost a quality that you have to have had before playing in the NBA; almost too late to get significantly better after that.

Parker was a top 3 PG last season and in the top 10 PER-wise and in the games prior to injury he was returning to that career-high form. As long as Parker is healthy he's going to be a much better guard and asset than Hill but Hill is an awesome guy to give minutes to in the meantime.

[mathbzh]

Hill looks WAY better than Parker when he was a 2nd year player.

Even that is debatable and Hill is almost 24... Parker was 20 yo.


As of now there is no debate Parker >>> Hill

Hill is doing very well but he still has a long way to go.

[murpjf88]

Its too early to predict Hill's future at this point. Tp has just entered his prime and should be the primary focal point fopr the next 4 years. At this point G. Hill is not a leader on the court and can't run the offense efficiently. He's strictly a shooting guard who can create his own shot.

Parker is having a down year due to injuries, but when healthy, is a top 5 point guard and capable of carrying the Spurs on his back. I expect him to come back strong and healthy next season and poised to take over the leadership role again.

[Muser]

Parker is better at everything but 3 point shooting.

[TDMVPDPOY]

well pop is givin ghill the keys to do whatever he wants on the court just like when pop gave parker the keys cause he had no pg during the rebuilding phaze....this is just a learning curve and ghill will only get better

parker + splitters rights could get us something....rudy + batum + oden...do it

[ffadicted]

Parker by far this is a garbage argument

[mathbzh]

well pop is givin ghill the keys to do whatever he wants on the court just like when pop gave parker the keys cause he had no pg during the rebuilding phaze....this is just a learning curve and ghill will only get better

parker + splitters rights could get us something....rudy + batum + oden...do it

No that I disagree with you, trading Parker may be a good option at some point.
But the learning curve is not something really predictable. Not every player progress every season as Parker did.
Hopefully, Hill will improve but this is far from granted.

[Obstructed_View]

George Hill is really good when Tony Parker's been suffering through foot pain all season and is currently unable to play. Seriously, why is this even a question?

[wildbill2u]

Why make this an either this one or that one question? Both are good and with Manu we have a very interesting 3 guard rotation where all 3 can play point or shooting guard.

When all are healthy we probably don't need the traditional back up SG and backup PG.

[toki9]

Significant contributions to multiple championships, NBA Finals MVP, multiple All-Star recognitions, hottie wife...

Vs...

Supposedly defensive minded, long (limbs...among other things), scoring combo-guard?

[Bruno]

Parker/Ginobili/Hill is an awesome 3 guard rotation. It's maybe the best in the NBA.

Spurs have a lot of other obvious weaknesses and people want to break what works? :rollin

[DesignatedT]

it isnt even comparison. get rid of this thread. its idiotic. parker>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>hill

[Pauleta14]

Parker is better at everything but 3 point shooting.


this!

[Ghjkll]

Tony is better, by far. Sometimes the amount of hate Tony receives around here is amazing, considering how much he has done for the team and how good as a player he has become.

[DesignatedT]

Tony is better, by far. Sometimes the amount of hate Tony receives around here is amazing, considering how much he has done for the team and how good as a player he has become.

yup.

[JR3]

I say start hill... trade parker and rebuild.

[bobby4germany]

Why does it have to be one or the other? Hill can run the point when it is necessary but he is better at the 2 so keep him there and keep TP at the point.

[Spursox]

Until Hill can take over a game like Tony and just abuse people, we can not compare the two just yet.

[Bukefal]

parker by far this is a garbage argument

+1


Tony is better, by far. Sometimes the amount of hate Tony receives around here is amazing, considering how much he has done for the team and how good as a player he has become.

Exactly. It's crazy and very disrespecting

[VBM]

Parker is better at everything but 3 point shooting.

I can't remember the last time I saw Hill make a wide-open 3...then again, I only see the national tv games...not our best moments

[Sisk]

Seriously? Settle down on GH. He's a good player, but still needs a few years before he's even near what TP offers us. George has the corner three over Tony.. that's it

Parker >>> Hill

terrible thread

[santymrc]

Seriously? Settle down on GH. He's a good player, but still needs a few years before he's even near what TP offers us. George has the corner three over Tony.. that's it

Parker >>> Hill

terrible thread

+1000

GH can become a force in the future, but as for now, TP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GH
The only thing that GH has is the corner 3. He's developing his offense a lot, getting better in lay-ups and jump-shot, but he's nowhere near TP lvl.

[TDMVPDPOY]

why ppl comparing a 2nd yr ghill to a prime parker for? this is fkn stupid

[baseline bum]

Who's better? Tim Duncan or Dejuan Blair?

[baseline bum]

Manu Ginobili or Malik Hairston?

[Sisk]

Manu Ginobili or Malik Hairston?

blair >>> duncan

hairston >>>>>>>>> gino
:lmao

[spurstd4]

I have all the respect in the world for tony. it just seems he stalls out the offense at times. tony's committed to the french national team in the off season so without any rest how effective is he gonna be? he played for them last summer and look how this year went for him. if tony is gonna burn himself out, why not trade him?

[barbacoataco]

Parker is way better and every Spurs fan who has been watching the games the last 5-10 years knows it.

One concern about Parker for me is that his blazing speed was his main weapon and made his game effective. If age/injuries/fatigue take that speed away from him, he might be a pretty average player.

[LoneStarState'sPride]

Parker's better hands down. Hill could be a better player when it's all said and done, but he's extremely raw as of now.

[MarCowMar]

Parker is significantly better. He's unstoppable offensively and works well enough defensively. Teams have to plan their defense around how to stop Parker.

It's really saying something about Hill that we can ask this question and have some argument about it though. Hill is capable of putting 20+ on the board playing within the offense and still offering great defense. Teams haven't started planning for him yet but he also has more time to develop. I see Hill retiring with one or more rings.

[timtonymanu]

TP>>>>>>> Hill

The only thing Hill has on Tony is 3 pt shooting and that he can dunk.

Tony for one has confidence and swagger that George Hill lacks against contenders. People here like to talk about Hill's defense, but Parker's is actually better. Hill has constantly been owned by so many point guards this year. Parker is a much better leader. Hill seems too shy right now to lead the Spurs.

[stéphane]

why ppl comparing a 2nd yr ghill to a prime parker for? this is fkn stupid

You're just being your usual self.

So just look at Tony's number when he had Georges age.
Makes it 05/06 season 18.9 on 54.9% FG to go along with 5.8apg.

Yeah yeah fkn stupid man.

[Admidave50]

wow wtf... people are getting bored here!

[Spurs7794]

Hill looks WAY better than Parker when he was a 2nd year player.


Seriously, do you even remember what we saw from Parker by his second year? In his first year, he had two game winners, including the shot that won us the division title. His second year, he made huge shots and game winners (ot game in Dallas when Dirk and Bradley slammed into eachother) and he showed the ability to just take over a game and win it himself, at that young age. He had 29pts in the clincher over the 3 time defending champion Lakers and he was always a better passer!

Hill is solid but he's far from Parker.

[TDMVPDPOY]

You're just being your usual self.

So just look at Tony's number when he had Georges age.
Makes it 05/06 season 18.9 on 54.9% FG to go along with 5.8apg.

Yeah yeah fkn stupid man.

ur stupid...

ur comparing what ? a 2nd year ghill to a 05/06 tp who has what a couple of years nba experience under his belt...

nba years experience is better then what age you come into the league...cause ur already got a few seasons under ur belt and adapt to the nba lvl, as compared to a 22yr-24yr old rookie coming out of college first/2nd year in the nba stats still on the learning curve. There is only a few exceptions to this like lebron, d12 who just came out dominated...

why dont you compare by nba years experience? 2nd year GHILL3 to 2nd year parker?

[TDMVPDPOY]

Seriously, do you even remember what we saw from Parker by his second year? In his first year, he had two game winners, including the shot that won us the division title. His second year, he made huge shots and game winners (ot game in Dallas when Dirk and Bradley slammed into eachother) and he showed the ability to just take over a game and win it himself, at that young age. He had 29pts in the clincher over the 3 time defending champion Lakers and he was always a better passer!

Hill is solid but he's far from Parker.

i see so you didnt remember the series he disappeared against the fakers...fck the fakers

[sonic21]

hill is better at everything except scoring, passing, mental thoughness, playmaking.

[sonic21]

hill isn't a top 10 PG in the league (yet).

[Mel_13]

Parker vs Hill?

Seriously?

[Spurs7794]

i see so you didnt remember the series he disappeared against the fakers...fck the fakers

He dissapeared against the Lakers in 04 after dominating the first two games, I agree with that. In 03 however, he was GREAT in the series against the Lakers and for all the crap we give him for how he SUCKED in the 03 finals, he was actually incredibly good in 4 out of the 6 games. George Hill hasn't shown the ability to take over a game yet...he can score but its not the same dominant offense that Parker brings. And he hasn't really played enough playoff ball yet to judge him as better than Parker at the same point.

[anakha]

i see so you didnt remember the series he disappeared against the fakers...fck the fakers

Selective memory strikes again. :lol

[stéphane]

ur stupid...

ur comparing what ? a 2nd year ghill to a 05/06 tp who has what a couple of years nba experience under his belt...

nba years experience is better then what age you come into the league...cause ur already got a few seasons under ur belt and adapt to the nba lvl, as compared to a 22yr-24yr old rookie coming out of college first/2nd year in the nba stats still on the learning curve. There is only a few exceptions to this like lebron, d12 who just came out dominated...

why dont you compare by nba years experience? 2nd year GHILL3 to 2nd year parker?

Man you said we can't compare an NBA sophomore and an all star in his prime and you're about right.
But the thing is that "the prime" is about physical attributes. Yeah having that many years of experience at such a young age for a player like Parker is a hell of an advantage when you want to compare players.
That doesn't change the fact that the fair way to compare player is at the same age and not when they get the same experience.

[DJB]

I'm curious what everybody's opinions are. Who is a better player? Personally, I think Parker is a better jump shooter and more proficient at running the Spurs offense, but I feel Hill is a better all-around player. Hill looks WAY better than Parker when he was a 2nd year player. Hill also plays BOTH sides of the ball very well and not just the offensive side. while Parker has become too much of a one dimensional scoring point guard..

Don't get me wrong, I love Tony Parker, he can be a terror offensively, but I think the Spurs have to take the leadership role from Parker and give it to Hill... Hill is the Future for the Spurs.

What are everybody else's thoughts on this?

Instant fail.

[Bambililos]

People bash Tony all the time because he doesn't pass enough, and yet they want Hill, a guy who can't throw an assist to the best PF of all time, to replace him.
This is hilarious.

[J_Paco]

This thread shouldn't have even been started. Is there any argument in George Hill's favor at all? Tony is superior to Hill in every way except 3-point shooting and (maybe) rebounding. Hill's defense is one of his strongest traits, but an argument can be made that he's not even better than Tony at that.

[team-work]

While it is interesting to compare the strengths/weaknesses of the 2, would it be more realistic to study how they can complement each other in order to make any noise in the remaining RS & the POs? Also hope Parker gets healthy ASAP.

Hill does have great potentials given it's only his second year. What the ceiling is remains to be seen.

[Ibanezsr]

This thread shouldn't have even been started. Is there any argument in George Hill's favor at all? Tony is superior to Hill in every way except 3-point shooting and (maybe) rebounding. Hill's defense is one of his strongest traits, but an argument can be made that he's not even better than Tony at that.

I would never make an argument that TP is better than Hill on defense. and BTW... Hill can play above the rim.. Not that it matters much but it is another thing to add besides being better at 3 pt shooting. When was the last time TP threw down an Oop?

[cheguevara]

this season: Hill > TP

last season: TP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hill

[TJastal]

I would never make an argument that TP is better than Hill on defense. and BTW... Hill can play above the rim.. Not that it matters much but it is another thing to add besides being better at 3 pt shooting. When was the last time TP threw down an Oop?

+1 Ibanezsr with the goods. :)

Hill plays the passing lanes 5,000,000X better than TP and also has quicker hands and can actually block some shots once awhile too.

Both are somewhat average at containment. So I'm not sure what exactly Parker does better on the defensive side of the ball, but somehow all the Parker fanboys have all started believing TP is better. :lol

On the offensive side of the ball Parker has the edge in experience, and much better halfcourt midrange game of jumpers, floaters, teardrops, layups etc. Has a tendency to get into 1 vs 5 a bit too often. Has great synergy w/Duncan.

Offensively, Hill shoots the 3 better, finishes on full court fast breaks better, is always unselfish when it comes to giving the ball up, but lacks the leadership and experience of Parker. Isn't as talented at at getting good open looks in the halfcourt which is one of Parker's strongest skills. Hill also looks to be 100X more durable than Parker so far in his career.

Overall I'd say they are very close, w/ Parker and his experience giving him the edge right now, but its much closer than the TP fanboys want to admit.

[Spurs7794]

Offensively, Hill shoots the 3 better, finishes on full court fast breaks better, is always unselfish when it comes to giving the ball up, but lacks the leadership and experience of Parker. Isn't as talented at at getting good open looks in the halfcourt which is one of Parker's strongest skills. Hill also looks to be 100X more durable than Parker so far in his career.

Overall I'd say they are very close, w/ Parker and his experience giving him the edge right now, but its much closer than the TP fanboys want to admit.

How could anyone say that Hill finishes full court fast breaks better than Parker? Parker may not be a great passer on fast breaks but he is the best at the one man fast break and somehow scoring. Also, Tony has been incredibly durable until this year. He used to miss some games with sprained ankles but this is the first year he's been constantly in and out. Tony's first two years, he hardly, if ever, missed a game.

[xapatan2]

+1 Ibanezsr with the goods. :)

Both are somewhat average at containment. So I'm not sure what exactly Parker does better on the defensive side of the ball, but somehow all the Parker fanboys have all started believing TP is better. :lol



The rest of your arguments just does not need to be quoted, as it is so so funny... (but you're not the only one to forecast your lack of BB knowledge.)

But for this quote :

Have a look at the many playoffs games played by Tony and maybe you'll figure out what he does on the defensive end.

And if you need a second opinion, be nice to find the many many game recap written by Timvp during the past decade at playoffs time and you'll know more about the defense Parker can give when it matters.

Xap'

[LoneStarState'sPride]

People bash Tony all the time because he doesn't pass enough, and yet they want Hill, a guy who can't throw an assist to the best PF of all time, to replace him.
This is hilarious.

This. This thread is completely ridiculous. How about this? I'll take both of 'em healthy right now.

[tothrowed]

yall niggas dumb imgaine if hill and parker are on the floor at the same time who niggas gonna guard

[cheguevara]

it's funny when ppl get all riled up when someone wants to compare a player to Tony/Manu/Duncan.

It's a freaking comparison, stop getting your panties in a bunch!

TP is better at everything except defense and 3pt. Hill is clearly better defender and a better 3 pt shooter.

TP is light years ahead Hill in the offensive game.

[yavozerb]

yall niggas dumb imgaine if hill and parker are on the floor at the same time who niggas gonna guard

are you serious...what the hell did you just say?

[mexpurs21]

Different players, Hill is a SG learning how to be a PG, thats why he doesn't record much assists, Hill is a better defender and 3pt shooter than Parker, however Parker is a much better player; better decision-making skills, ballhandling, finisher, uses the glass like no one else does.

[jayc23]

Hill duh, this thread is stupid -- jk jk

[mathbzh]

ur stupid...
why dont you compare by nba years experience? 2nd year GHILL3 to 2nd year parker?

2nd year Hill
12.1 ppg 2.8 ast 48% 40% from 3 PER : 14.5
2nd year parker
15.5 ppg 5.3 ast 46% 33% from 3 PER: 16.5

And Parker was still much younger...

I really like Hill but there is really nothing to debate. Parker is way better.
hopefully one day the comparison will be legit. But we should wait a couple of year.

[Mr Bones]

It's clear that Parker is better but the more interesting question might be, given Hill's low salary and good play, how interested would the Spurs be this summer in an offer that included a quality Big and a good b/u PG in exchange for Parker? What if the Knicks Offered Lee & Duhon?

[mathbzh]

It's clear that Parker is better but the more interesting question might be, given Hill's low salary and good play, how interested would the Spurs be this summer in an offer that included a quality Big and a good b/u PG in exchange for Parker? What if the Knicks Offered Lee & Duhon?

Both are UFA this summer... I wonder what their future contract will be.
For sure some team will propose Lee a fat contract and I don't know how much he really worth.

But if that kind of trade was possible... well, I don't know.
Moreover, I am not really sure Parker will stay in San Antonio at the end of the next season.

[Josepatches_]

Today Parker is better.In 2 years Hill could be better

[Pauleta14]

seriously?...... 3 pages???!!

[vander]

I just hope the FO is smart enough to realize that Parker can not be part of the post-TD Spurs. he's already peaked, he's no Steve Nash or Jason Kidd who can play great well into their 30's, his game is quickness and recklessness, and those things are already starting to erode, plus he's taken a beating over the years and is much older than his age when it comes to the shape his body in in now. in 2 years he probably won't be a top ten PG in this league, maybe not even top 15.

and it would be better to trade him rather than let him walk via free agency and get nothing in return.

If we don't win it all this year, we won't ever win it again with the big 3, and it's time to start rebuilding, TP is the only player we could trade that might get us some young talent in return.

[baseline bum]

^^ I'd expect nothing less from a fucking retard Bonner fan.

[vander]

^^ baseline bum with another thoughtful retort, raising the bar for ST, because he doesn't want ST to be just another internet message board full of 15 year old's calling each other idiot and retard

he knows that ST is better than that

:toast

[Ibanezsr]

2nd year Hill
12.1 ppg 2.8 ast 48% 40% from 3 PER : 14.5
2nd year parker
15.5 ppg 5.3 ast 46% 33% from 3 PER: 16.5

And Parker was still much younger...

I really like Hill but there is really nothing to debate. Parker is way better.
hopefully one day the comparison will be legit. But we should wait a couple of year.

Nothing to debate? Parker was playing alongside an MVP-like Duncan and the likes of a young Gino & Stephen Jackson. Hill plays with the likes of a declining Duncan, a less than spry Gino (1st half of yr) and stellar players like Bogans, Bonner, Dice, Blair, etc who aren't the greatest finishers. TP also played 34 minutes a game to Hill's 29. Parker also turns the ball over more (could be attributed to more playing time though). Parker also had plety of Professional basketball experience prior to his 2nd yr in the NBA... There is more to the debate than meets the eye. I think getting a big in a trade for Parker would make this team a Champion next year...

[Dr. Gonzo]

are you serious...what the hell did you just say?

Something about black people guarding Hill?

I don't know.

[Dr. Gonzo]

If we don't win it all this year, we won't ever win it again with the big 3, and it's time to start rebuilding, TP is the only player we could trade that might get us some young talent in return.

That's a very good point.

[mathbzh]

Nothing to debate?

Nothing to debate between Hill and Parker now.

I was just saying 2nd year Parker was as good if not better as 2nd year Hill despite being much younger.

Whatever, the assist and TO numbers are misleading with Parker being a full time PG and Hill playing 1 and 2, so basically I agree there performances as 2nd year are comparable. All I am saying is that there is nothing granted when you try to guess the ceiling of a player. Hill may or may not improve.
For Parker we all know what he became.
He has his flaws but not a lot of player are better than last year Parker.


I will stop here, but a few things in your argumentation are a bit strange.


and the likes of a young Gino
A rookie Gino who was a 7 ppg in 20 minutes player... the "less than spry" Gino has much more influence than the rookie Gino.

& Stephen Jackson.
Not exactly an All-Star back then

... And actually the fact than Duncan had little help offensively is probably the reason why Parker's number were so good.

[Ibanezsr]

Nothing to debate between Hill and Parker now.

I was just saying 2nd year Parker was as good if not better as 2nd year Hill despite being much younger.

Whatever, the assist and TO numbers are misleading with Parker being a full time PG and Hill playing 1 and 2, so basically I agree there performances as 2nd year are comparable. All I am saying is that there is nothing granted when you try to guess the ceiling of a player. Hill may or may not improve.
For Parker we all know what he became.
He has his flaws but not a lot of player are better than last year Parker.


I will stop here, but a few things in your argumentation are a bit strange.


A rookie Gino who was a 7 ppg in 20 minutes player... the "less than spry" Gino has much more influence than the rookie Gino.

Not exactly an All-Star back then

... And actually the fact than Duncan had little help offensively is probably the reason why Parker's number were so good.

I brought up Gino and Jackson because they could finish when given an opportunity. They weren't just 3 pt shooters like most on SA this yr (Bonner, Bogans, Mason). You are correct in saying that Gino has more influence but that influence forces Hill to defer to him more... especially since both run PG at times when on court together.