Right on the money, spurs had hill ranked a top 10 player so either they are incredibly shrewd or dumb as .....I go with the first but I do wonder why hill over chalmers?
I think they chose Hill because he has improved his game every year since he started playing collegiately except for one season where he was injured, but otherwise I think the Spurs like players who have something to prove to themselves if not to others. Chalmers doesn't strike me as the humble, hardworking type that is going to do anything he can to help his team win. Hill has the right at ude so much that he impressed Pop and that isn't easy to do.
nice.
It will be so nice when SL begins and we get some inkling of Hills game and potential. First game against the Grizzlies should be interesting.
Experience/Accomplishments
Derrick Rose: took his team to the college National Championship
George Hill: played at IUPUI
Draftexpress.com is a great website. Hill has an amazing wingspan for a guy his size, which often seems to be a pretty common factor for good players. There's a strong belief among many scouts that the "T-Rex" syndrome-- short arms in relation to height-- is a major factor in why some good college players don't succeed in the NBA. I remember reading one piece a few years ago where one scout said there was no way JJ Red would succeed in the NBA because of this physical attribute. One guy who had a shorter than usual wingspan measurement this year was Jarrryd Bayless from Arizona. It'll be very interesting if George Hill becomes a legit NBA player and Bayless underperforms... something to keep an eye on.
Exactly, the stats posted on page 1 are interesting, but to take that info and draw some type of conclusion as to what type of player Hill will be is a mistake. There is a reason Rose was the expected #1 and Hill was expected to be a 2nd round pick even with their similiar athletic numbers.
Now,now:
Jacques Vaughn: led Kansas to best regular season record in country and took his team to the Final Four
Steve Nash: played at Santa Clara
I just checked Sonny Weems vs Mayo........ Weems is better in nearly every category
Here's hoping that Hill and Weems outplay Rose and Mayo
(of course im joking. We all know those pre-draft stats are interesting but don't take into consideration talent).
I know Hill will turn out to be a better pick than most think. I know Weems isn't going to be much for the Nuggets, heck he may not even play, but its fun waiting and seeing if later picks will contribute effectively.
He has the same physical tooks as Rose. He chose to play at IUPUI due to personal reasons, but was recruited by Florida and some other major DI-A programs:
source
So Rose goes to a talent laden Memphis program, plays in the national le game, and ends up as the #1 overall pick. Hill plays at D-IAA IUPUI, stars, and is a surprise low 1st round pick.
We're about to find out how much that difference really means.
actually, vaughn never got the jayhawks to the final four. (i realize that wasn't the crux of your post, but i will be DAMNED if i let the jayhawks get any unearned credit on this board.)
look at this here fellas
if you are going to knock on HILL for playin in a ty division with his stats, compare to him other players in history who have played against scrubs or in HS that posted nasty numbers, its too early to name him a bust, but i like what i see if that can be transferred to the nba.
heck bogut played in a ty division and was no.1 pick......
HILL was a steal if its true his a top15 prospect that happen to fall to us.
The NBA has seen so many unheralded players coming from obscure schools who have had/are having great careers in the league. Granted, they are exceptions to the rule but I have a good feeling about George Hill.. how many HS grads would voluntarily choose to play for an unknown school after he had been courted by the big name programs? I really think he could be the next diamond in the rough for the Spurs.
re: wingspan
a more accurate measurement would be for straight reach or arm length. Someone with very broad shoulders could have a deceptively large wingspan with relatively normal length arms. Conversely, someone with narrow shoulders and long arms could register as being unimpressive in winspan.
Doesn't it strike anyone odd that Hill has an inch longer wingspan but an inch shorter standing reach than Rose? Is that because Rose has a short neck for his body? Or shoulders more narrow than Hill? Or do Hill's shoulders sit lower than normal for his height? Who knows?
I understand man.
why would george hill's shoes be .25" taller than rose's?
Maybe he's "gellin"
Oh yeah......
He's sooooooooo gellin.
it's about what you do on the court
not what you do with the measuring stick
Im not sure Hill has the size to play the 2.... first of all hes very slight... and seconly being nearly 6'3" in shoes... his standing reach isnt all that impressive.
His wingspan is fantastic and thats definately more crucial at the PG spot than standing reach... allowing him to bother his opponents with his reach and get into the passing lanes.
I think his standing reach doesnt really allow him to play much at the 2... he has really long arms so this is probably resulting from Shelden Williams syndrome (long head).
Consider im 6'4" and i have a standing reach of 8'5"... yet my wingspan is only 6'5"
Nearly all of these guys do extensive stretching throughout their high school years to gain that extra inch... just like vertical reach training.
Oh, and im white.
Faulty memory on my part. Good catch. Mike Bibby and Arizona knocked them out in the sweet 16.
You can see how some scouts start obsessing over these numbers, looking for subtle indicators. I bet if any guy from the US olympic track team was tested for speed/agility/vertical leap, he'd rate a super athlete with "huge upside' even if he'd never touched a basketball in his life.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
