George Hill sucks!!! :pctoss

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hater

:lol ppl still saying that trade was good for both teams

most lopsided trade in the last couple of years IMO

---

:tu

:lol

LOL Hill still with a slightly below league average player efficiency rating.

It's a good thing the Spurs don't need to rely on Leonard's FT's. Well, there was game 6 but nobody remembers that one.

I don't understand the hate for Hill. He was good for us while he was here.

Hill was the reason spurs would struggle against memphis...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by moisaenz

Hill was the reason spurs would struggle against memphis...

---

that and playing Matt Bonner 21 minutes a game vs. Marc Gasol and Zach Randolph :lol :lmao

and playing DeJuan Blair over a minute a game :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoops Czar

It's a good thing the Spurs don't need to rely on Leonard's FT's. Well, there was game 6 but nobody remembers that one.

---

I'm not sure what you're implying here by bringing KL into the conversation. Are you saying you'd prefer to have Hill on the spurs? If so, I'd like to hear more about why hill would be preferable to Leonard. Because I can think of zero reasons.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=106...goryid=2378529

George Hill is the fly in the buttermilk in Indiana. It's odd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheyCallMePro

Well that makes more sense considering George Hill isn't a great ball handler. I just remember being so nervous on draft night if we were going to make a move to deal either one of them. Honestly I had no idea who it would be. I remember the consensus was that we couldn't get enough value trading Tony and that nobody really saw the value we placed in Hill either. Internally we wanted desperately to make a move because of the growing tension between them. The Pacers obviously placed more value in Hill than other teams because he was a home town kid, so we just got lucky making a deal with them.

In hindsight I just can't believe how stupid the rest of the NBA was. If I was any team, I would've jumped at the chance to try and trade for Parker. But that just goes to show you how underrated and undervalued Tony has been throughout his entire career. I guess teams figured we really wouldn't have let Parker go and they didn't want to embarrass themselves getting rejected. But still, at that moment in time, I believe that if we had been offered a bunch of draft picks or young prospects, we would have taken it and kept Hill instead. Alas, it is now a forgotten and brief chapter, but now with the Pacers and Spurs potentially meeting up in the Finals, it's becoming intriguing again.

One more thing. Secretly I'd feel somewhat justified if the Spurs and Pacers met in the Finals and Hill beat out Parker. I know Tony's a lot better than Hill and that Hill obviously has flaws handling the ball and does so much less on the offensive end than Tony does, but still. I thought Hill was a decent enough replacement that along with trading Parker and getting new pieces would make our team better (which seemed to be fledgling at the time, having just lost to Memphis 4-2 in the playoffs). I wonder if the Hill supporters at the time (like me) would come out of the woodwork again. I dunno. It would sure be interesting!

---

Hill wouldn't beat out Parker. His team might, but Hill is a pimple on the ass of progress in Indy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juggity

I'm not sure what you're implying here by bringing KL into the conversation. Are you saying you'd prefer to have Hill on the spurs? If so, I'd like to hear more about why hill would be preferable to Leonard. Because I can think of zero reasons.

---

Why don't you read the post that bumped this month old thread and you'll have your answer. I could care less about George Hill. I was one of the few who thought he was overrated from the start while other wanted him as TP's replacement. However, a Spurs fan should be the last one to call out a player for missing key FT's after the game 6 collapse.

Hill's game was and still is horrible to watch. Dude has no poise while dribbling, shooting or passing.

Frustrating to see he hasn't developed much since then. I'd rather have a player like Trevor Ariza than Hill tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gummi Clutch

I don't understand the hate for Hill. He was good for us while he was here.

---

He was but on Indiana he can be a train wreck, especially as a PG. Not meant to be a full time starter at PG. He is better served as a combo like he was in San Antonio.

:pctoss

:lmao this fucking scrub

almost as bad as Beno Udrih

bump :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scanry

Hill's game was and still is horrible to watch. Dude has no poise while dribbling, shooting or passing.

Frustrating to see he hasn't developed much since then. I'd rather have a player like Trevor Ariza than Hill tbh.

---

He's one of the main reasons why Indy is looking like a bottom feeder. Dude has no gameplan or Bball IQ

we dodged a bullet folks. can you imagine if this scrub was still our backup PG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hater

He's one of the main reasons why Indy is looking like a bottom feeder. Dude has no gameplan or Bball IQ

we dodged a bullet folks. can you imagine if this scrub was still our backup PG

---

Hell, he'd still be our backup 2 as well with spot minutes at 3, and Pop would stick him on the Lebrons and Durants defensively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hater

He's one of the main reasons why Indy is looking like a bottom feeder. Dude has no gameplan or Bball IQ

we dodged a bullet folks. can you imagine if this scrub was still our backup PG

---

We might have lost in the Finals last year.