Shooting Guard-a-palooza

[Ocotillo]

Now that the off-season is here there are a heap of threads about rebuilding and shipping either R.J. or Bonner off but the thing that has my attention is the Spurs have a lot of depth at the 2.

Granted, some of the players are playing out of position due to lack of depth elsewhere but here is who we have at the 2 at this time.

Manu Ginobili Whether he is the starter or the sixth man, Manu is the best 2 on the team even at his age. Never say never, but I don't see him going anywhere. He is close enough to the end of the road that fans (ticket sales) want to see him retire in the silver and black. He is also the leader of the team emotionally.

George Hill George is really a combo guard who is often being thrust as the back up point. When he is on the floor with Manu, Ginobili is the primary creator not GHill. George probably has the most value of any of the twos for a trade. I love the guy but he may your best shot at moving either R.J. or Bonner as the sweetner of a small contract that the other team actually covets. Unless the team addresses the back up point situation, it would be a risk to hang onto him once Manu is not there to be the playmaker.

Gary Neal Seems to be our version of the Microwave for those old enough to remember Vinnie Johnson. His contract is extremely small so getting value for him directly would not likely work. Just as is the case with George, if he is to be moved, he would likely be packaged with another player.

James Anderson He has enough height that he is being played as a small forward but he is smallish for that position. We don't really know what we have with him as fans as we saw a very small sample of his play. For all intents and purposes, he will be like a rookie next season because he played so little. I would be suprised if another team targeted him.

Nando De Colo I think he has played point in Europe but from what I have read, he is not athletic enough to play the point in the NBA. If he comes over this upcoming season, he will likely not play much or be D-League fodder. Unlikely to generate too much interest from other clubs for a trade.

The Spurs need another big man, at a minimum to replace Dice. They need an NBA back up point guard and the ever elusive long three who is defensive minded and can hit the three from the corner. As you can see, we are very deep at the two so I think it is likely one or more of the above guys will actually be traded at some point before the tip off of next season.

[Roger Freemason Jr.]

None of those players are going anywhere. Pop will have Nando play point regardless of who thinks he isn't athletic enough, maybe Nando playing point will be a good fit in the Spurs system, these things are hard to determine without actually seeing them first-hand.

James Anderson didn't get enough playing time due to injuries. There's no way Pop ships him off before they see what he can do when given extensive playing time. I personally believe he will be great for us.

Neal speaks for himself, he was a steal for us, good contract, good player. Neal is a player who thrives in this system, he's staying.

Hill is patchy, which is why he's the only one I can see being packaged in a trade. But I don't think it would happen.

& Ginobili is retiring a Spur.

[Roger Freemason Jr.]

Btw, don't forget that we'll have Da'Sean Butler playing at SF next season, he was huge for Duke in the Final Four. & nobody has seen him in an NBA game.

& Ryan Richards will be coming from across the pond pretty soon, he's another 6'11 guy, he will become a good role player.

[Bruno]

I don't really get your point about Hill and his inability to play PG without Manu helping him.
First, Manu is at least here for two more years. Anticipating is always good in business but it's a little too soon to worry about that.
Second, when Manu will be gone, minutes will be open at the SG spot. You can imagine Hill being then a full time SG.

Nando de Colo isn't part of the equation for the moment. He was very good last year in Spain but he has regressed since that.

Anderson is huge question mark. He was very good before his injury but his inability to come back at a good level is worrisome.

At the end, Spurs have 4 good guards (Parker, Hill, Neal and Ginobili) with Manu able to play some SF. I don't think there is some kind of logjam. Trading one of Neal or Hill could be an option but only if Spurs have a great trade offer on the table.

[8FOR!3]

I hate to say it because I'm a fan, but I think if you really plan on making a big trade this offseason, Hill has to be part of the package. Especially if you really think you'll get rid of Jefferson's contract.

[Fireball]

I really wanna keep Hill ... if TP leaves I think Hill would improve drastically and play with more confidence. He has shown that when TP was injured for longer stretches.

[Ocotillo]

I get it that Hill can thrive since Manu will be here a couple of more years and who knows, maybe we get a true back up point that works well with him. My point is there is a lot of depth at the two and he and Manu are likely the ones other teams would target.

Always, you do a deal if a good deal is on the table. You don't make a trade to simply make a trade because you are throwing stuff against the wall and trying to see what sticks.

I included Nando because the Spurs have his rights. He might be used as trade filler and if not and he were signed this off season, then he adds to the depth of an already deep position.

[jjktkk]

IMO Pop has to consider trading TP for a starting 4/5. That is the only plausible way of possibly improving the Spurs ability to contend in Duncan's final years.

[TJastal]

IMO Pop has to consider trading TP for a starting 4/5. That is the only plausible way of possibly improving the Spurs ability to contend in Duncan's final years.

Or Pop could just actually like, play Splitter.

[Obstructed_View]

Yeah, not having a point guard on the roster would be a great way to throw dirt on the end of Duncan's career.

[TJastal]

Yeah, not having a point guard on the roster would be a great way to throw dirt on the end of Duncan's career.

Overrated IMO.

The spurs need a "floor leader" more than a "pure" point guard who is going to log 10+ assists every night. Derek Fisher plays that role in LA, and he's no point guard either. Hill IMO has everything Fisher has skill wise he just needs to get some confidence so he can hit clutch shots like Fisher. Which would come with a starting role.

[Buddy Holly]

Nando de Colo isn't part of the equation for the moment. He was very good last year in Spain but he has regressed since that.

How one performs overseas has nothing to do with how one would perform in the NBA.

[Obstructed_View]

Overrated IMO.

The spurs need a "floor leader" more than a "pure" point guard who is going to log 10+ assists every night. Derek Fisher plays that role in LA, and he's no point guard either. Hill IMO has everything Fisher has skill wise he just needs to get some confidence so he can hit clutch shots like Fisher. Which would come with a starting role.

Derek Fisher may not rack up lots of assists, but he has been a starting-caliber point guard his entire career. He wasn't a shooting guard in college, he was a point guard who set team records for assists. Without Parker, the Spurs don't have anyone who can do it consistently on the entire roster. George Hill is not a point guard. The disaster of having him run the offense in game one of the playoffs should be enough evidence for anyone. Hoping for a guy who airballed a critical three pointer from his spot to be as clutch as Fish is, to put it kindly, a pipe-dream, and is only exceeded by thinking he can be transformed into an adequate point guard on a team without one.

The Spurs have already suffered enough from not having a rotation that allows people to play at their natural positions without hamstringing them further. If you want to try to build the roster through trades, you have to start with a position at which you have some depth, which is shooting guard, and you have to move a player with some value, which is Hill.

[TJastal]

Derek Fisher may not rack up lots of assists, but he has been a starting-caliber point guard his entire career. He wasn't a shooting guard in college, he was a point guard who set team records for assists. Without Parker, the Spurs don't have anyone who can do it consistently on the entire roster. George Hill is not a point guard. The disaster of having him run the offense in game one of the playoffs should be enough evidence for anyone. Hoping for a guy who airballed a critical three pointer from his spot to be as clutch as Fish is, to put it kindly, a pipe-dream, and is only exceeded by thinking he can be transformed into an adequate point guard on a team without one.

The Spurs have already suffered enough from not having a rotation that allows people to play at their natural positions without hamstringing them further. If you want to try to build the roster through trades, you have to start with a position at which you have some depth, which is shooting guard, and you have to move a player with some value, which is Hill.

You may be right. Then again, you may be wrong.

Hill just needs confidence, that can be remedied IMO. A starting gig would do wonders for his confidence. As for his point guard skills, they will get better. The spurs really just need a "floor general" who can get them into their sets and handle the ball on the break (like what Fisher does for the lakers).

Fish: 28mpg|38%FG|39%3pt|80%FT|2.7 AST|1.9 REB|1.2STL|.8TO|6.8ppg
Hill: 28 mpg|45%FG|38%3pt|86%FT|2.5 AST|2.6 REB|.9STL|1.3TO|11.6ppg

Pretty similar #'s if you ask me, and that's with Fish having the luxury of a steady starting role. There's a reason the lakers wanted Hill in the draft, he would have been Fisher's future replacement.

[yavozerb]

How one performs overseas has nothing to do with how one would perform in the NBA.

The usual issue with overseas players is PT since most are young players..Nando will be 24 this year and his game seemed to plateau and some would say has even dropped slightly. I could be wrong but with his 3pt shot dissappearing, his game has gone south very quickly.

[Obstructed_View]

I may be wrong, there are some truths that are hard to work around: Hill is not currently, nor has he ever been a point guard, Parker is by far the Spurs' best player, and point guard is currently the Spurs' weakest position, and it's not even close.

If the idea is to reload for the end of Duncan's career, then getting rid of Parker in favor of Hill is a gigantic gamble. If the expectations for Parker were so high that we want him gone after the numbers he put up this year, then it's going to be a long long long wait until Hill approaches those numbers.

Fish: 28mpg|38%FG|39%3pt|80%FT|2.7 AST|1.9 REB|1.2STL|.8TO|6.8ppg
Hill: 28 mpg|45%FG|38%3pt|86%FT|2.5 AST|2.6 REB|.9STL|1.3TO|11.6ppg
Tony: 32mpg|52%FG|36%3pt|77%FT|7.3AST|3.4REB|1.3STL|2.8T O|17.5ppg

The Spurs simply don't have the firepower to be able to give up Parker's offensive numbers and expect to even make the playoffs. If you want to get a big for him that has the same impact, then you need to be targeting Dwight Howard, because there's probably not anyone else that's going to do anything but make the Spurs worse. Be prepared to give up some young talent and take back Gilbert Arenas, because that's likely the only way Orlando even returns your phone calls. Also, Howard is gone to LA in two years.

[yavozerb]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlBLNpmdPhI
Another reason pop wont bring Nando over..:lol

[jjktkk]

Yeah, not having a point guard on the roster would be a great way to throw dirt on the end of Duncan's career.

You seem to think your a NBA GM, so why don't you come up with some realistic options for the Spurs to improve this roster.

[Obstructed_View]

You seem to think your a NBA GM, so why don't you come up with some realistic options for the Spurs to improve this roster.

You are barely smart enough to spell GM properly, but I'll indulge you since you can't seem to defend trading Parker when he's the only point guard on the roster and the only impact player who isn't past his prime.

Since the roster wasn't the reason the Spurs got bounced in the first round, then realistically, they need to keep their core and build through free agency. If they want to package draft picks with existing players and Dice's contract for an additional player, then they should be able to get a player at a position of need, being either center or small forward. They need a backup point guard and they need to get back to playing defense instead of being cute and playing guys out of position. The Spurs have had undersized guys at too many positions, starters coming off the bench for no reason, guys who can't score and can't play defense giving big minutes, and haven't developed certain players for no explicable reason.

[jjktkk]

You are barely smart enough to spell GM properly, but I'll indulge you since you can't seem to defend trading Parker when he's the only point guard on the roster and the only impact player who isn't past his prime.

Haha, what a funny guy. Seriously, please tell me your just acting stupid. That was my whole point. TP is the Spurs most valuable trading commodity, hence the reason I brought his name up. Yes his being possibly traded would leave a void, but The Spurs would have to find a servicable pg to pair with Hill and Ginoboli, who can run the offense.

[Obstructed_View]

Haha, what a funny guy. Seriously, please tell me your just acting stupid. That was my whole point. TP is the Spurs most valuable trading commodity, hence the reason I brought his name up. Yes his being possibly traded would leave a void, but The Spurs would have to find a servicable pg to pair with Hill and Ginoboli, who can run the offense.

The void that you create by trading him away exceeds the need that you fill by bringing someone in, and it's a testament to your ongoing idiocy that you fail to understand that. You're trying to suggest trading him while not suggesting that the Spurs blow it up and start over. When you do the former, you do the latter.

I'm disappointed in the way Parker played in the playoffs too, but the Spurs without Parker struggle to make the playoffs next year unless you bring in a perennial all-star in a trade, and good luck with that.

[Leetonidas]

I like Hill but I think it's time to move him. He will never turn into the player some think he can be. He is too passive and gets down on himself way too easily and plays himself and his team out of games. I think him packaged with Blair and RJ could get us a decent player. Parker is our best trading piece next to Hill but we aren't going to get better by trading Parker because we won't get equal value in return. And in his case, corporate knowledge is very useful.