Printable View
how things have changed for the spurs it wasn't long ago that i was wishful thinking they gonna win no. 5 with those guys as supporting crew ...
then ....
neal
green
leonard
jack
diaw
mills
happened....
i think :lobt2: is not too far fetch an idea tbh
Well, you can't put all these players in the same category.
Hill was a very good Spur but losing him to get Leonard was worth it.
I'm glad that RJ, RMJ, Bogans and Udoka are gone. They sucked as Spurs.
Quinn and Novak were end of the bench players. Nothing wrong with them and Novak has been great with Knicks this year.
I would gladly welcome back Hairston this summer to take James Anderson roster spot
spot on i just had to mention quinn coz mills is an upgradeQuote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
where does hairston play nowadays?
Italy.Quote:
Originally Posted by KenziE
NOVAK
is better then booner
matt has beeen a surprise this year though
negative...ur only looking at his shooting...novak can't play d worth crap...bonner is way better than novakQuote:
Originally Posted by ducks
Hill played great vs Dallas in 2010.
Danny ferry is the man
At what level? And how is Malik doing ??Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
Malik is a scrub, but he looked like he knew what to do he just didn't have the skill setQuote:
Originally Posted by FkLA
He is playing with very good teams that plays the Euroleague. He has had some health issue with a bad back last year and with his Achilles tendon this year. When he was healthy, he's been very good.Quote:
Originally Posted by FkLA
I'm not pushing for Spurs to sign him but he could be an option this summer if he is a free agent or if he has a NBA opt out clause in his contract.
it was reported that Malik has signed a two years contract with Milano, so he won't become a FA in 2012. it wasn't reported, if the contract has a NBA opt out clause though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
considering the development of Green and Leonard and the fact that Spurs will have Manu, Sjax and Neal under contract for 2012-13, I can't see them bring back Malik 2012 anyhow. 2013 might be a totally different situation, when the contracts of Manu, Sjax and Neal expire.
Kawhi and Green give us the young athletic wing role we thought Hairston could fill.
Would u rather have green or hill?
For this team, Green. Hill is the better overall player, but was pretty much redundant to what Parker/Manu/Neal provide.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Worlds_finest
Hill didn't fit in the mosaic.
Overlapping skills no enhancement affects on other players.
Glad he's doing well with Indiana.
If Hill wasn't very good, the Spurs wouldn't have been able to trade him for a player the caliber of Kawhi Leonard. Nor would he be the starting PG for a pretty good Pacers team right now...............Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Watson
Disagree. Kawhi was a rookie and although he was one of the top guys that the Spurs were looking for, the trade didn't prove Hill's worth as high as you think it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek;5862843[B
Sure it did. If George Hill wasn't a good player, he wouldn't have been as big a part in the Spurs rotation as he was, nor would the Pacers have traded a pretty good draft pick for him. I still trade him for Kawhi Leonard 10 times out of 10, but that doesn't mean he's not a good player.Quote:
Originally Posted by 100%duncan
I know he was a good player, yes, being involved in a Spurs rotation proves that you are worth it that you have great bball IQ, and balanced skills. But you're example didn't proved your point. I mean, a 6th man on a good team traded for a rookie proves that that player is good? I think no. And yes, in hindsight I still trade Hill for Kawhi 10/10 times.Quote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek
:toastQuote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek
There is a perverse sentiment that exists where it is necessary to diminish the abilities of a player when comparing them to another player that is favored by the individual drawing the comparisons, as if it lent more credibility to their opinion.
But if you really think about it, by devaluing the competition, then the achievement of the other player being better... also loses its grandeur.
I saw Hill as a Solid role player. Not 'good', but above average overall. Just not what we needed.
Flawed analysis. We traded Hill for a LOTTERY PICK. It takes a pretty good player to net you a pick that good. I do NOT mean a star, because a star will net you a top 10 pick. We traded a decent rotation player, and good player overall.Quote:
Originally Posted by 100%duncan
Funny to compare Green to Hill, since we traded him for Leonard, but Leonard really plays 3/4, so you can't compare them as well. Regardless, the 3 position, and small 4 position, were a much bigger concern for our team defensively than the 1 and 2.
All that said, Hill was not what we really needed; he provided good defense at the 1 (although scorched by Nash), short to defend the 2, good ball handling for a 2, poor ball handling for the 1 (at the time, evidently he is good now), and scoring skills that including slashing, creating off the dribble, spot up shooting, and 3pt shooting.
What we needed more was excellent defense at the 1 and 2, with more height to defend bigger sgs. Green is a better, bigger defender than Hill, but Hill is a better passer (pg) and creator. Green really can't play the 1.
Still, Green fits our needs better.
My point was to disagree with the poster who said that George Hill wasn't any good and wouldn't have gotten traded if he was.Quote:
Originally Posted by 100%duncan
He was traded for a guy one pick away from being a lottery pick. It's not like the Spurs dumped him for some no name second round draft pick. No doubt Leonard has suprassed expectations this year, but the Spurs still thought they were acquiring a guy who would be their starting small forward in the not too distant future.Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Watson
Malik Hairston :lol:lmao:lmao
It's unbelievable how many of you all had man-crushes on that scrub. He's not even good enough to make an NBA roster, and you geniuses thought he should have been a starter for the Spurs???!!! :lmao:lmao:lmao
Hill is a major reason Indiana is advancing.
Crucial in G2 and G3.
The deal sure turned out well for them.
We'll see what happens against Miami.
Hill is a Big reason why Indiana Is advancing . Can some one put up the stats of Hill vs Kawaii 2012 Play offs ? I think Hill is doin a bit Better than kawaii . :flag:
Hill helped of course, but he is not a big reason why Indiana is advancing. They still have Granger, Hibbert, Paul George and David West.
They faced Orlando without Howard and without Howard they're the worst team in the playoffs by far. Indy should have swept Orlando.
Call me again after the series against Miami.
Hairston has done very well last year, and he is doing well this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keepin' it real
the guy made huge baskets at Pionir vs Partizan, in the 4th, to advance Olimpia to Euroleague top 16.
Anyone that scores those baskets at Pionir has balls, has my respect and can make it in the NBA.
Right now, Malik Hairston is better than Gary Neal was at his age.
Plays for a better team, has a way better contract than Neal had, and, in fact that Neal HAS with the Spurs.
Plus Neal was a head-case and Hairston is not.
If neal turned out well, the only reason hairston should not is that he is probably making too much money to go back.
Did you watch the games?Quote:
Originally Posted by elemento
G2 third quarter, G3 final? He made the difference in my opinion.
Im jus sayin , Hill Back on the Spurs squad would only make the spurs even deeper/better.
Spurs w/ Leonard > Spurs w/ Hill.Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent
HillQuote:
Originally Posted by Silent
PPG: 14.2 RPG: 3.00 APG: 2.4
Leonard
PPG: 7.0 RPG: 3.30 APG: 0.5
:stirpot: Discuss
I was thinking the same thing the otherday. As much as I believed in the squad we had, there was still no way we were going to win with RJ. Thank god for that trade.:flag:Quote:
Originally Posted by KenziE
If we had Hill plus everyone else? Sure. But we certainly don't need Jack playing all game at the 3, and at Danny Green's size, he's a better fit at the 2 than the 3.Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent
Hill is a difference maker for the Pacers, but it's because they needed a lead guard who could not only pass but also shoot and defend. The dropoff for us from Hill to Green isn't nearly as important as having a legit small forward in the lineup.
And longer term, Leonard's ceiling is way higher than Hill's.
Disagree. If Hill was still around, Green would have been stuck on the bench and likely playing for another team right now. Green > Hill. Hill often had mental lapses and was too undersized to defend the taller guards in the league and too limited in his point guard skills to play point guard. Before the Hill lovers attack me, I just want to say I myself am a huge George Hill fan and I'm happy he's figured things out in Indy. I just think his fans overrate him on this board. That being said, I thank him for his contributions here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent
And man that 2009-2010 roster was a joke. I remember when we got Jefferson, McDyess, and Blair everyone thought we were the most stacked team in the league. I felt the same way, tbh.
I remember Pop saying he should be fired if they didn't win it all. It took him all season just to figure out a rotation and he really didn't till Parker went down with the injury and he had less choices. I think that team was much better than they showed.Quote:
Originally Posted by timtonymanu
ThisQuote:
Originally Posted by Yuixafun
I've watch the Pacers last 30 games or so. I saw most of them on TV, but went to last couple. Hill plays well for Indiana. He does things in a "timely" manner so to speak. His points or ball distribution, steals, etc. comes at the best point in time for the Pacers.
On the Spurs he learned how to play ball the right way and now the Pacers have an asset. The Spurs have an asset with Kawhi. It's a win-win situation for the both of them. As an added plus, he came from the inner city here, so his "NBA Cares" stuff goes over well with the youngstas and they like him!
In closing, I won 50 bucks from a casual Pacers fan who didn't know much about him from his time in the pros so I bet him that he'd come up big in the playoffs an won while we were watching games 2 and 3! Everytime George came up clutch I'd say, "See, thats the Spurs Way!!!"
well you guys make good points but bottom line is the spurs wont have a LEGITIMATE and REALISTIC chance of winning the championship with....
RJ,Hill,RMJ,BOGANS,HAIRSTON,UDOKA,QUINN,NOVAK
as the supporting cast thats just how it is Hill may have been a good player for the spurs but they aren't winning the title with him as a major part of the rotation ...
Hairston is a fringe NBA player, his ceiling is probably a decent energy guy off the bench. He gave good effort but you could tell he just wasnt that good. I used to get out a kick out of people here crucifying Pop for not playing guys like him and Mahinmi to a lesser extent. :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Keepin' it real
Really, what kind of problems did he have overseas? Gary seems real laid back tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by temujin
so what was hills stats compared to rjs for the memphis series last season....
http://it.answers.yahoo.com/question...1073616AA5b6QPQuote:
Originally Posted by FkLA
Told the GM he had a knee problem and would not come to practice on a Friday, before an important game.
Went partying to Milano (200 miles), instead.
Lost the car keys.
Called the GM in the middle of the night telling him he was in Milano and had no idea how to get back to Treviso.
Lost his job the following day.