48MoH: Dwyer: George Hill is ‘Overrated’

Quote:

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

I don't mean this to disparage George Hill in any way, but it's pretty clear to me (now) that he's become the same cause célèbre that Speedy Claxton once was. I realize that this is a George Hill thread and I don't mean, in any way, to compare Hill's game to Claxton's. But at bottom in any discussion like this one, the theme seems to be indistinguishable from the conversations we had in 2003, 2004, and even into 2005: George Hill (like Speedy Claxton) is not Tony Parker; he's an exciting fresh face, perhaps with a bit of tenacity that isn't always obvious in Tony Parker, with a slightly different game that appeals to some.

It's a funny comparison to me because in each case, we're left comparing a limited player who will never be more than a role player with a guy who has been elected to 3 All-Star Games. What is striking about that is that Tony Parker has played well enough for years to have garnered the respect of coaches around the Western Conference and basketball in general (I think), who recognize him to be a formidable player, no matter his supposed faults, and one who is among the very best players in the game. Yet through exactly the same time period, Spurs fans continue to wish Tony Parker was someone else -- or maybe more specifically, somewhere else.

It's funny that Tony Parker was least susceptible to criticism when his backup was the much-reviled Jacque Vaughn. Put even a reasonably-talented player behind Parker and some Spurs fans are ready to send Tony Parker on his way.

There's a midway point to this whole Parker/Hill comparison...

No he is not as good as Parker like the Parker haters say, but he also isnt just another half-decent PG that will be nothing but a role player like some of you Parker lovers make it seem. The kid's got the talent to have a very good career, and thats becoming apparent to the point where you simply cant deny it unless youre blinded by the Parker love. He's more than capable of driving and finishing although definitely not like Parker can. He also has a significantly better jumper than Tony...and his defense, while somewhat overrated, is still miles ahead of what Tony's is.

Also some of us "Parker haters" want to ship him out not only because he has his flaw but also because of what we'd get in return. The way you guys make it seem youd think we want to give him away...when in reality our main point is that we'd rather rock a line-up of Hill-Manu-RJ-(insert star big man)-Duncan over what we currently have. We are not saying we prefer Hill-Manu-RJ-Dice-Duncan over Parker-Manu-RJ-Dice-Duncan, we are not saying Hill > Parker or that Hill=Parker. We're simply saying that Hill's emergence has afforded us the luxury to deal Parker to fill other voids.