Reply With Quote
Hill can defend any PG in the league, better than Mason.
I couldn't agree more timvp. Mase as a back up PG is at best a waste of time and a waste of Hill talent.
This team doesn't need Mason running the point. Besides he has no skills for that. On POs mode when TP is on the bench, if Pop doesn't trust Hill, He'll give the point to Manu, so why this experiment ? to test Hill and take the risk to kill his confidence ? Be ready in case Manu can't go back ? I don't want to think about this last option.
For the recurrent issues Pop / PGs I'm not such a good bb expert to have an accurate opinion. What I know is TP became what he is today thanks to Pop tough coaching but the same ingredients don't give always the same result. He cannot manage Hill on a same way he did for TP and Mason at the point is not a good idea.
Hill can defend any PG in the league, better than Mason.
Having Mason as a backup PG is for more offense and nothing more.
Hill is a liability on the offensive end. Mason can score and create.
Hill will be back as a back up once Manu comes back.
From what I've seen of Hill, I think he's stronger mentally that some are giving him credit for. Just see how he stepped in yesterday. He'll do what he can with the minutes given and he won't complain or shut down mentally like a certain purse-wearing Euro, even if that means spot defensive duties for the time being.
yes, it's Pop's fault we've had for backup PGs over the years
Last edited by nkdlunch; 03-09-2009 at 10:33 AM.
Nice thoughts, timvp. I agree that lately Pop has been unfairly harsh on Hill.
In my mind, the reason Pop has limited Hill's recent minutes is because of his passive offensive play. It's a weird thing, but Hill seemed more confident in himself during the first 30 games of the season than the last 30. I have absolutely no idea why because as we know, Pop loves his aggressive PG's, so he wouldn't have told Hill to turn it down a notch. But lately Hill doesn't even look to shoot, drive or even create. It's very frustrating to watch especially considering we have seen him dominate patches of games offensively.
Not enough can be said of his defense and rebounding though. The thing with his rebounding is that it isn't just chasing down long rebounds or getting cheapies, he drags down big rebounds amongst the trees. It makes a huge difference against the athletic teams and would certainly help against LA.
His man to man defense is exceptional and reminds me of a young Lindsay Hunter. It isn't an overly physical type of defense so he doesn't face the problem of no respect from the referees and when he does get beat his wingspan helps him to recover and contest. His defense against Allen Iverson and Steve Nash comes to mind and help display his defensive versatility against 2 very different players.
Heading into the stretch run I hope to see Hill back to getting all the minutes backing up Parker and some minutes in the backcourt with Parker against teams that occasionally run small backcourts (Kidd/Terry, Nash/Barbosa, Fisher/Vujacic, Brooks/Wafer etc). I don't even mind him getting some extended minutes if Parker is stinking it up, particularly when Manu is back and Parker's ability to carry the scoring load isn't as neccessary. I actually like Mason as a backup PG in certain situations, but as a rule, Hill's defense and rebounding can really add to the Spurs rotation, especially when the Big 3 are all firing.
This is a good theory. It certainly explains a lot of what we've seen over the years.
It is telling that experienced points who have come to SA flame out quickly.
One would think protecting the rock, defense and initiating the offense would be Pop's top 3 requirements. I agree that Pop doesn't know what he wants. If anything, it seems like a position that gets lost in the grander scheme. Perhaps it's because he expects all perimeter players to play a certain way offensively, yet that is at odds with the basic requirements of the position. It makes a bit of sense that he would try out Mason there, as I think offensively that is what Pop has in mind for his backup point. The question will be can he provide the defense that Pop expects at that position?
Also, I agree on the view that Pop's tactics and treatment of backup PG's is a bit harsh. Like timvp said, they are backups for a reason. Let them be what they are and don't try to turn them into something they are not. The short leash towards the backups needs to stop, in the regular season at least. Hill's passive offensive play might be annoying, but he does make up for it with defense and rebounding.
You must be forgetting that Tony Parker was inserted as a starter by the 6th game of his rookie year. Yet, he still got overwhelming doses of the "tough love" treatment. At times, Parker was forced to relinquish minutes and duties to Speedy Claxton, Terry Porter or whoever, but he was never benched or DNPed. The point is, the tough love treatment can be administered without having to totally strip away his PG responsibilities in the process.
As a former college shooting guard, let's not forget that Hill is still making the conversion to PG. Therefore, he's still learning the position and needs consistent practice reps and in-game minutes to expedite his conversion. Are we also forgetting that Hill ran the team beautifully in Parker's absence? We know he's more than capable. IMO, he's earned the right not to be DNPed or having his responsibiilities stripped.
On another note, Pop admitted that he bungled handling Beno. Now, Beno WAS as soft as tissue paper. so he wilted in Pop's treatment of hiim. I don't know how Pop could've handled him better. I just know that Pop took some of the blame for his failure. Therefore as great of a coach as Pop is, let's not act as though he's infalliable in his approach toward developing players in his system. He's made some mistakes and has, at times, overvalued the skills of others, as Timvp has pointed out.
I agree that Pop wants to curtail the sense of en lement that most young players come in with and the "tough love treatement" is the way to go. Yet, there is a difference between giving out tough love versus stunting a players development.
Hill is a future 1st team defense. Pop better not this up. Hill is the future.
So how do you explain Jacque Vaughn? Pop has loved Vaughn since day one.
I'm worried too about the Pop Effect crushing George Hill. BUT, I've seen Pop play him at the 2 alongside Mace and Tony. I don't know if it's 'cause Pop already figured George can't play the 1 the way he wants him to or if he wants to give George minutes anywhere he can.
I agree Pop is very harsh on PG.
But on the other hand he is a coach who is playing for rings, who is coaching one of the top players ever...
I think he don't care too much about developing players. He just wants to win.
Either you can support his treatment and be ready for the playoffs, either you can't and you get out of the rotation.
Parker looks like a really tough guy. But his first playoffs runs were not easy.
Talented or not, if you are soft during the playoffs, you will be destroyed by some hard nosed veteran.
I can't say I like what he is doing to Hill. But I have learned to trust Pop decisions
Is it possible we're all (including myself) looking into this way too much? I had a thought pop into my head that makes a lot of sense. Maybe they're letting Mason run some point right now because Pop has no intention of bringing JV onto the playoff roster, and he's not comfortable with ONLY having Hill as our PG if something happens (God forbid) to Tony. So if Mason can run some point, and something happens to Tony, he won't have only Hill running the point. We're looking too deep into this, I think.
Mason is great, but not great at running the point, IMHO. Mason is not incredibly quick and he doesn't finish at the rim very well (he got blocked a few times by that backup Sun's center with the ponytail).
Also, Hill is a better defender than Mason, but Mason did have a couple of good defensive stints against the Suns.
Great post by Timvp, btw.
Disagree.
Spurs have struggled at the backup PG spot for years but you try to explain that by a wild theory (Pop being a good coach except for backup PG spot) while in fact the explanation is as simple as it can be.
The last time Spurs had a good backup PG was in 03 with Speedy. Since that, Spurs never spend more than $1.5M per year on a backup PG. The less money you spend, the harder it is to find a good player. Spurs never made the investment to get a good backup PG. You can regret it but when you had a limited amount of money, you had to make choices.
About Hill :
First, Hill struggles a lot with his jumpshot. A unproven perimeter player with that flaw is a huge question mark for the playoffs. Hill is 21/85 (24.7%) on 18-24 ft shoot this season. He is 20/57 (35.1%) on 3 points shot. It's better but he hit these shot mainly early in the season. In January/February, he has had a 20 games stretch where he didn't hit a single 3 point shot.
Second, Pop started to go away of Hill as backup PG with Manu injured. Manu changes a lot of things for what the backup PG has to do and it's possible that Hill get back his previous spot int he rotation when Manu will be back.
Don't forget that as nice as Pop can be, his main goal is winning, not helping young players to improve by giving them playing time the way a lottery team 'd do!
It is still a business and you have to accept your role or prove your coach wrong (that's what did TP by the way...)
Pop is working the hard way to see your limits and who you react in many different situations...
He'll use what he needs in Hill and not the contrary even though it's not in Hill's interest...
But to be "optimistic", George seems to be a smart guy, he'll accept whatever his role is and will keep improve his game (once again as TP did!)
While I agree with this sort of philosophy in general and with your post in particular, it must be said that this method is pretty much an all or nothing approach.
It's definitely what made TP great (beside his talent and ego) but while it would be nice to have 2 TPs, what we really need is a solid backup PG, so maybe the method should be somewhat adapted (toned down) to the role of the player.
OTOH if TP should go down with an injury (God forbid) it probably is a good idea to have somebody tough enough to replace him...
Free Money for y'all...
I said that Hill's confidence and development will be stunted if he didn't get the playing time.
Manu should be traded for a star big and Hill Mason and Parker could cover the guard positions with big minutes.
I think that Pop is just working his rotations at guard to see what he has. Mason as a PG has gotten a bit better at handling the rock and even attacking the basket. Not good, but better than the first times doing this. It give Pop another option over JV's lack of offense if necessary in the playoffs
As for killing Hill's confidence, good luck with that... He strikes me as pretty mentally tough and ready to perform what every match up role Pop asks of him. Performing well in the 4th qtr by smothering Nash on defense was a good example.
Granted, both Hill and Mason could benefit from handling the ball more, but there is only so much time available.
Bottom line: Pop is still seeing what options/combinations he can use in the playoffs.
I like the available options.
I would agree that it's a mistake to bench Hill so much. Defense alone should get him court time.
But I disagree with Ward, Van Exel and Stoudamire. Those guys were all completely finished, especially the first two. Maybe the Spurs could have won in 06 without Van Exel getting destroyed and shooting horribly.
Vaughn makes sense for Pop's system as a point guard who can:
1. Protect the rock when advancing it into the half-court.
2. Initiate the offense in the half-court.
3. Defend the point guard position.
That's why Pop would have faith in a Jacque Vaughn come playoff time over more offensively gifted points.
The thing is, Pop recognizes Vaughn's offensive limitations. And I think that this is a theme this years for the team overall. Bruce's out of the starting lineup. The Spurs were seriously contemplating trading for Vince Carter. No, Ghost Writer and SequSpur haven't taken over the front office.
Pop is simply transitioning the Spurs into a higher scoring team and betting that he can get the new members of the rotation to execute passably on defense while improving markedly on the offensive side. I think the next shoe to drop in this transition is to improve the interior defense (meaning they'll make another run at Camby this summer). Maybe this has been brought on by the fact that Bruce is nearing the end of his career or, as has been hinted by the FO in the press, they see the league trending this way and are simply changing with the times.
give pop a stud like rose, and he probably stunt his growth also....
If timvp is going Marcus Bryant, something must be seriously effed.
Yea like he did with this Tony Parker character right?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
