Okay so I just HAD to bring up this comparison...

[sexinthatsx]

Nicolas Batum, or Kawhi Leonard?

A couple years ago, the Spurs were 1 pick away from landing Nicolas Batum but instead drafted George Hill, who was traded to the Pacers to obtain a first round pick in Kawhi Leonard. That said, looking back at it, would you have wanted Nicolas Batum, or Kawhi Leonard?

[Obstructed_View]

I'd be fine with either of them. They're both immensely talented, both are hard workers and students of the game, and both are improving dramatically as their careers go. On the downside, both struggle with chronic injuries.

It remains to be seen until we find out about the other two picks the Spurs got for trading Hill. If one or both of them turn into rotation players then it's no contest.

[8FOR!3]

I always thought Batum had tons of upside but some nights he just doesn't show up

[SanDiegoSpursFan]

I think Leonard is a little bit better than Batum.

[Kidd K]

At this point I'd rather have Leonard than Batum. I think George Hill was a fine player for the time we had him too, so I'm not at all disappointed in what he brought for us.

I don't think having Batum would've put us over the top against any of the teams we lost to. The same negatives that happened will still have happened. Though. . .we probably would've have acquired Richard Jefferson and instead spent money in another area, so maybe there's that argument.

In the end, I liked George Hill, and I like Leonard. So I'm not too choked up about not having Batum.

[KL2]

Leonard easily, he's better than Batum in every single way, he's consistent too.

[Obstructed_View]

Well, I don't know shit, anyway; I wanted Mario Chalmers with that Hill pick once Batum was gone. :lol

[Chinook]

I'd be fine with either of them. They're both immensely talented, both are hard workers and students of the game, and both are improving dramatically as their careers go. On the downside, both struggle with chronic injuries.

It remains to be seen until we find out about the other two picks the Spurs got for trading Hill. If one or both of them turn into rotation players then it's no contest.

Only one other pick, 42nd overall (Bertans). The Hanga pick was the Spurs' own. Lorbek was the third piece in the trade, and that seems to just be moot now.

[letmk]

Right now, I think Leonard is better suited for this Spurs team. However, if Batum was drafted by the Spurs from the beginning, I suspect he may be a better player today.

[Obstructed_View]

Only one other pick, 42nd overall (Bertans). The Hanga pick was the Spurs' own. Lorbek was the third piece in the trade, and that seems to just be moot now.

You got me again. Told you I didn't know shit. :lol I was referring to Bertans and Lorbek, not remembering how exactly they came to be, though they were part of the trade. Not likely either of them will ever pan out, but stranger shit has happened.

[spurraider21]

Only one other pick, 42nd overall (Bertans). The Hanga pick was the Spurs' own. Lorbek was the third piece in the trade, and that seems to just be moot now.

yep. not even worth bringing in lorbek at this point. bertans was the better prospect and is developing at a better pace than lorbek ever did

[ShoogarBear]

Here's another one: Danny Green or George Hill? (Assume you get to keep Kawhi either way.)

Now obviously Hill is the better all-around player. But Green has proven to be the better three-pointer shooter and is arguably turning out to be a better swing defender. Green's biggest deficiency is that he can't be used to initiate an offense, but certainly within the Spurs system Green's skillset is turning out to be a better fit.

[Chinook]

Here's another one: Danny Green or George Hill? (Assume you get to keep Kawhi either way.)

Now obviously Hill is the better all-around player. But Green has proven to be the better three-pointer shooter and is arguably turning out to be a better swing defender. Green's biggest deficiency is that he can't be used to initiate an offense, but certainly within the Spurs system Green's skillset is turning out to be a better fit.

I agree with you that the real trade-off is between Hill and Green.

Hill being the better player is pretty debatable. The only advantages Hill has is ball-handling and finishing. Especially when you compare Green now to Hill his last season with the Spurs, I think Green edges him out.

[Chinook]

You got me again. Told you I didn't know shit. :lol I was referring to Bertans and Lorbek, not remembering how exactly they came to be, though they were part of the trade. Not likely either of them will ever pan out, but stranger shit has happened.

Yeah, technically neither of us is right anyway, as the trade was Hill for the rights to three players, and not actually picks. Therefore, if I consider Leonard and Bertans picks, I should have considered Lorbek one, too (46 in 2005). They all count the same on draft night.

I have a lot of hope for Bertans. If he can get to the States this season, I think he could be well served in a Cory Joseph--style Austin bootcamp. Lorbek has signed long term in Spain (for about $2.6 Million a season) so he's out until he's in his 30s at the very least.

[timvp]

Batum is a deceptively terrible defense player.

I'd take Leonard -- and it's not even that close.

[freetiago]

Batums a better player then Leonard right now
and if he came to the Spurs from day one with his best bud Tony he probably would be a top 5 SF tbh
Batum is also a lanky semi lockdown defender
he can spotup or shoot 3s off the dribble/coming off screens from anywhere not just corners
hes a great passer like his french national teammates are
way better slasher then Leonard
Leonard is younger and a better rebounder so he has more upside

found this nugget about Batum
"Despite the stated desires for his game, he joined three other players -- LeBron James, Kevin Durant, and Scottie Pippen -- by notching 100 treys, 350 dimes, and 80 swats in a single season. Expect another jump in Batum's diverse repertoire for the 2013-14 season"

[ShoogarBear]

I agree with you that the real trade-off is between Hill and Green.

Hill being the better player is pretty debatable. The only advantages Hill has is ball-handling and finishing. Especially when you compare Green now to Hill his last season with the Spurs, I think Green edges him out.

If you swap Hill for Green on the Spurs, I think the stats are nearly equal or maybe better, although the overall effectiveness probably isn't.

I don't see any way that Green gets close to Hill's numbers (14p, 4r, 5a) given the same 35 mpg on the Pacers.

[racm]

Batum is a deceptively terrible defense player.

I'd take Leonard -- and it's not even that close.

Batum is 6'8" and very long but he's only ~200 lbs. That's Manu's playing weight. :lol

Also worth noting that Portland plays Matthews against the bigger SFs like LeBron because he's bigger and tougher.

Leonard guards 2s, 3s, and 4s (he's not that good against PGs) well enough, he shut down Klay Thompson in the playoffs.

[racm]

If you swap Hill for Green on the Spurs, I think the stats are nearly equal or maybe better, although the overall effectiveness probably isn't.

I don't see any way that Green gets close to Hill's numbers (14p, 4r, 5a) given the same 35 mpg on the Pacers.

The problem is that while Hill's much better on offense, the defense would likely slip. Hill's a good defender and is one of the factors in Indiana's top defense, but Green's taller and longer, making it easier for him to frustrate guys like Steph Curry.

[Chinook]

If you swap Hill for Green on the Spurs, I think the stats are nearly equal or maybe better, although the overall effectiveness probably isn't.

I don't see any way that Green gets close to Hill's numbers (14p, 4r, 5a) given the same 35 mpg on the Pacers.

Green is putting up 14/4/2 per 36, which is good for a spot-up shooter who's only facilitative responsibilities involve making entry passes. He definitely could fail in another system, but I don't think he'd have to get Hill's assist numbers to be as good as Hill.

A lot of that comes from positional differences. Green is the more diverse defender. He's able to guard three (sometimes four) positions. Hill could barely manage two-guards (which is fine, since he should only have to guard points with George next to him). By that same token, Hill's position has forced him to take on a bigger role in the Pacer's offense. He HAS to get the assists, because that's his job as a point-guard. As a shooting-guard, Green doesn't have to (which is great, because his ball-handling would probably prevent it). Both of their strengths and short-comings are affected by their position, so it's hard to directly compare them.

[racm]

Green is putting up 14/4/2 per 36, which is good for a spot-up shooter who's only facilitative responsibilities involve making entry passes. He definitely could fail in another system, but I don't think he'd have to get Hill's assist numbers to be as good as Hill.

A lot of that comes from positional differences. Green is the more diverse defender. He's able to guard three (sometimes four) positions. Hill could barely manage two-guards (which is fine, since he should only have to guard points with George next to him). By that same token, Hill's position has forced him to take on a bigger role in the Pacer's offense. He HAS to get the assists, because that's his job as a point-guard. As a shooting-guard, Green doesn't have to (which is great, because his ball-handling would probably prevent it). Both of their strengths and short-comings are affected by their position, so it's hard to directly compare them.

Green's numbers are great for a 3 and D wing, tbh.

Hill was always more of a combo guard, a guy who could facilitate, attack, and shoot like an undersized Manu (though he borrowed Tony's floater)

[Chinook]

I think we'll be having Leonard and Joseph comparisons to their classmates for a few years.

It's amazing how much talent was in the middle 30 picks of that draft. It's possible that the Spurs could have taken a completely different path with their picks and still filled all their needs. For example: Vucevic (15th), Butler (29th), Keith Benson, (42nd) and Isiah Thomas (59th). There were literally dozens of combinations like that. And people called it a weak draft class...

[Chinook]

Green's numbers are great for a 3 and D wing, tbh.

Hill was always more of a combo guard, a guy who could facilitate, attack, and shoot like an undersized Manu (though he borrowed Tony's floater)

Hill was a great fit for the Spurs back when they could go with a three-guard rotation primarily. Now that Ginobili can't play as many minutes (or games) as he used to, having a reliable starting two-guard and back-up point is much more important. It's possible Hill would have lost effectiveness if the Spurs were forced to put in at one position. Having Green and Joseph is a major luxury for this roster.

[racm]

Hill was a great fit for the Spurs back when they could go with a three-guard rotation primarily. Now that Ginobili can't play as many minutes (or games) as he used to, having a reliable starting two-guard and back-up point is much more important. It's possible Hill would have lost effectiveness if the Spurs were forced to put in at one position. Having Green and Joseph is a major luxury for this roster.

Pretty much, but the underlying issue the Spurs had during the Hill years was a lack of wing depth: Either too old (the corpse of Finley was seeing the most minutes at SF, and Pop had given up on 39 year old Bowen) or too underwhelming for his price tag (hwmnbn).

Also, 2011 was a great draft. Sure, people will underrate it because there are no top-level stars (even if Irving, Leonard, Thompson, Faried can all get there) but it had a bunch of good talent when you got past the lottery (since the lottery teams usually can't pick well).

Of the top 5 picks, I'd rate Irving as a good one, with Thompson and Valanciunas pretty good. Kanter's okay, and Williams is bleh.

The rest of the lottery is: Vesely (lol Washington), Biyombo (lol Charlotte), Knight (eh, okay, undersized SG), Walker (eh), Fredette (lol Maloofs), K. Thompson (good, but Leonard owns him), Burks (wow, Utah), Markieff Morris (eh?) Marcus Morris (started to look even worse when he joined his brother in Phoenix)

Meanwhile, outside the lottery, you have Leonard, Harris, Faried, Parsons, Thomas...

[Chinook]

The 2009 draft ended up being a great one for players who would end up on the Spurs, too, as four of their players were taken in the second round that year (Blair, Green, De Colo and Mills) and Baynes went undrafted that season. Hopefully, the team will get four solid players out of 2011, too, when the Euros come over.

[Chinook]

2010 was an absolutely horrible draft, though, especially in the middle 30. The Spurs picked a bad year to have a high pick.

[ShoogarBear]

Surely been mentioned elsewhere, but worth repeating: Spurs are the only team who have not had a lottery pick since 1997.

[100%duncan]

Put Batum instead of Leonard this season and we won't be in the WCF.

[eric365]

As someone said earlier, I'd take Batum out of the draft because the spurs would have developped him better.

[mudyez]

IMHO Batum probably would be a different type of player today. Remember that Grantland piece two or three days ago? There was some truth in assuming Leonard wouldn't be as good if the Wiz drafted him and Vesley may at least be something with the Spurs.

Head to Head I have to agree that Leonard is the better defender and that he fits better with the Spurs. But if we would have drafted Batum he might have become just what Leonard seems to become and I'm not sore if Batum has a better upside.

[ego]

Batum !!!!, he's better than Leonard in every single way : defense assists FTs and he plays with Diaw, TP and De Colo with the french team

[ginobilized]

Leonard has a toughness both physically and mentally that makes him a better fit for this team than Batum.
Batum's got a more polished game offensively, but this team needs the grit and versatility that Kawhi brings.

[ohmwrecker]

Batum would, most likely, become a more consistent player in the Spurs' system. He and Leonard have pretty similar skill sets, but Kawhi is better by a margin. It would be great to have both.

[Mugen]

I'd rather have Kawhi. 3 Frenchies is plenty tbh.

I'd also have rather Green than Hill when factoring in fit on this team. Green and Kawhi's length is a big reason for our improved perimeter defense. George is a good player and solid defender but the positions he can defend are more limited than Danny's. If you throw CoJo in there as well then Green/CoJo over George is a no-brainer.

[Obstructed_View]

Batum !!!!, he's better than Leonard in every single way : defense assists FTs and he plays with Diaw, TP and De Colo with the french team

Leonard's a better defender, an elite rebounder, and scored more points this year. Free throws were a wash, he's much better at generating steals, and he doesn't turn the ball over as much. This is playing three fewer seasons in the NBA. Unlike Batum, he still has upside.

[SAScrub]

Aside from Leonard simply being a better player, Kawhi will get paid, on average, $9 million/yr less than Batum over this and the next 3 seasons.

[ironman2886]

I don't know why but it looks like every time Batum plays the Spurs, he plays angry or with a chip on his shoulder. He was taken early, we all know management would haven taken him instead of Hill. I'd take kawhi over Batum. They are very similar players. You couldn't go wrong with either one if healthy.

[baseline bum]

Here's another one: Danny Green or George Hill? (Assume you get to keep Kawhi either way.)

Now obviously Hill is the better all-around player. But Green has proven to be the better three-pointer shooter and is arguably turning out to be a better swing defender. Green's biggest deficiency is that he can't be used to initiate an offense, but certainly within the Spurs system Green's skillset is turning out to be a better fit.

I'd rather have Green. He'll never be anywhere close to the offensive talent Hill is, but this team has tons of offensive talent and thus Hill's skills give strongly diminishing returns on this team. But the real reason I would much much rather have Green is because of pick and roll defense. Green has looked pretty good dealing with screens while Hill is one of the worst pick and pop defenders this team has had in a long time. It's no coincidence he got lit up over and over by Nash in the 2010 WCSF when he would start the game against him (one of the biggest bonehead moves of Pop's career IMO). Hill just doesn't fight over screens well and anyone who likes to shoot off the pick is going to light him up. In the wrong matchup he was a defensive liability on par with 2001 Derek Anderson since you could just pick and pop Hill to death. That's the reason I was so glad the Spurs weren't the ones who ended up paying his second contract.

[cd98]

Batum is probably better than Kawhi, at least right now, as he's had more time to develop. I haven't looked at the stats, but Kawhi looks like he's a better rebounder (offensively and defensively), which I think is a huge plus for a small forward, especially if everything else is close to equal.

[TD 21]

I've always liked Batum, but I'd take Leonard without even having to think about it. He's already better and he's been in the league three less years.

Not to hijack your thread, but to me the real question is, Leonard or George?

[Em-City]

I'd take Leonard, based solely on character, focus and willingness to improve.

[Obstructed_View]

I've always liked Batum, but I'd take Leonard without even having to think about it. He's already better and he's been in the league three less years.

Not to hijack your thread, but to me the real question is, Leonard or George?
George went at 10, and James Anderson went at 20. Not exactly like the Spurs ever had a shot of him falling that far.

[TD 21]

George went at 10, and James Anderson went at 20. Not exactly like the Spurs ever had a shot of him falling that far.

What does that have to do with what I said? I meant, the real question is, is Leonard better than George or would you take him over him for the next ten years.

[Richie]

Honestly, I think I'd rather have Batum for those extra 3 years.

Nicolas Batum in 2008 means never having Richard Jefferson. Having him for all those years could have made a difference.

If you're asking me if I'd trade Leonard for Batum or if they were both available in 2008 who would I take, it would be Leonard hands down. However adding Batum in 2008 would have given us an excellent 4th piece around the big 3 for longer, and maybe we'd have won a title.

[Obstructed_View]

What does that have to do with what I said? I meant, the real question is, is Leonard better than George or would you take him over him for the next ten years.

Why the fuck would you compare Leonard to a player the Spurs had no shot of getting? Or are you talking about George Hill, the guy who was going to leave in free agency at the end of last season and the Spurs were going to lose for nothing?

[tesseractive]

IMHO Batum probably would be a different type of player today. Remember that Grantland piece two or three days ago? There was some truth in assuming Leonard wouldn't be as good if the Wiz drafted him and Vesley may at least be something with the Spurs.

Head to Head I have to agree that Leonard is the better defender and that he fits better with the Spurs. But if we would have drafted Batum he might have become just what Leonard seems to become and I'm not sore if Batum has a better upside.

This. For example, Leonard probably would be a much worse shooter for a lottery team, because the Spurs are well known for Chip being able to help guys sort out their shot mechanics.

Of course, the other thing to remember is that a lot of players with potential would never develop better with the Spurs, because the Spurs screen for guys that they think will work from a cultural standpoint. Bismack Biyombo is one heck of a physical specimen, but I'm not sure he and our program would have been a good fit. :lol

[tesseractive]

Honestly, I think I'd rather have Batum for those extra 3 years.

Nicolas Batum in 2008 means never having Richard Jefferson. Having him for all those years could have made a difference.

If you're asking me if I'd trade Leonard for Batum or if they were both available in 2008 who would I take, it would be Leonard hands down. However adding Batum in 2008 would have given us an excellent 4th piece around the big 3 for longer, and maybe we'd have won a title.
Wow, that's right. I'd take Batum for the chance to dodge the RJ bullet alone. :lol

And then we'd have had RJ's cap figure to spend on someone who's actually good at the game of basketball.

It's impossible to say how things would have turned out, but it would have totally changed the makeup of that team during the lost years (a.k.a. the RJ era).

[MR-Clutch]

Why the fuck would you compare Leonard to a player the Spurs had no shot of getting? Or are you talking about George Hill, the guy who was going to leave in free agency at the end of last season and the Spurs were going to lose for nothing?

Chill bro...I think he's comparing them because they're both young SFs with high ceilings. Why do we have to limit comparisons to just guys the spurs had a shot at? It's not like we had the chance to draft Batum and passed on him. It's just fun.

[jesterbobman]

Batum is a deceptively terrible defense player.

I'd take Leonard -- and it's not even that close.

Shockingly, timvp says something smart.

In general, people get too wrapped up in all the abilities a player has, as though it's a video game where having athleticism and offensive skill makes you perfect. Leonard isn't as athletic as Batum(He's freakishly long and a good athlete relative to most of the Spurs, but he's not prime Dwight/Nate Rob/Jeremy Evans as an athlete) but he doesn't make mistakes. For his career, he only has 5 more fouls than steals, a TOTAL of 106 Turnovers and has a career TS% close to 58%, Slightly higher than Batums.

In the PER world that favours high usage guys, Kawhi was ahead of Batum last year, and crushed him in WS48(.166 to .099). Batum has had better seasons by both Metrics in the past, but the fact that Kawhi is ahead by both, and is 3 years younger means it's not close.

It's entirely possible that Batum would be better had he played with the Spurs from the Start, but Portland will also have a staff of professional coaches. A large part of Kawhi's improvement can be traced to his own work ethic.

[therealtruth]

Here's another one: Danny Green or George Hill? (Assume you get to keep Kawhi either way.)

Now obviously Hill is the better all-around player. But Green has proven to be the better three-pointer shooter and is arguably turning out to be a better swing defender. Green's biggest deficiency is that he can't be used to initiate an offense, but certainly within the Spurs system Green's skillset is turning out to be a better fit.

Green's getting better at initiating offense. That pass to Kawhi in the 1Q was pretty good and kind of Ginobili-like.

[racm]

Green's getting better at initiating offense. That pass to Kawhi in the 1Q was pretty good and kind of Ginobili-like.

I still trust him to make a PUJIT 3 more than a transition layup, though :lol

And I doubt Hill, as long as he is, could do chasedown blocks.

[Obstructed_View]

Green's getting better at initiating offense. That pass to Kawhi in the 1Q was pretty good and kind of Ginobili-like.

And when he dribbles it off his foot or turns it over when he's bringing up the ball, it's kind of Hill-like.