Reply With Quote
Kidd won R.O.Y.
Your assessment is a little off.
If Pop wanted a pure PG he could have gone with Chalmers. He wanted a defensive guy, but he doesn't play him to take advantage of his defensive abilities...
Kidd won R.O.Y.
Your assessment is a little off.
Last edited by mardigan; 04-14-2009 at 01:10 PM.
It wouldn't matter. Pop would've DNPed him too.
The frustrating part to all this is that if there wasn't any type of evidence that the kid could play at this level or if he had shown signs of being overwhelmed, I could understand Pop's reluctance. However, that assessment couldn't be further from the truth about Hill. This kid aint afraid of nothing and ran the team like a veteran during the month that he started, while TP was out. All this fabricated prattle that Hill can't play or that he's not ready to contribute now is just BS.
Once again, this is Pop being a lil' old lady and allowing the Beno nightmare of 2005 to influence his decision about a kid that is the complete opposite, in terms of mental makeup and compe ive tenacity.
Yeah he was a horrible shooter but he could always pass. I think he averaged 8 assists in his rookie year.
That's your opinion, really. I would be upset if Vaughn was selected over Hill, but Pop is really picking Mason over Hill, and I'm not entirely against that, even though they bring different things to the table.
Yeah, Pop has gone from short leash to no leash at all.
I suppose this is another of his military hazing tactics for rookies in order to break them down and make them humble. If the kid had come in with an at ude or sense of en lement, I could understand. I sensed none of that with Hill.
DAmn right that's my opinion. The Spurs have enough scorers and Hill is not an offensive liability, by any means. The added bonus and case to support Hill getting time is that he's already a superior defender. This team needs more guys that can defend because it is probably one of the most defensively inferior teams in the Duncan/Robinson/Pop era.
It's easy for us to jump to conclusions that Hill is worthy of getting the backup minutes at the point, but Pop and the coaching staff see the guy day in and day out at practice. Maybe he just hasn't shown the development in terms of court vision and play making abilities. I think he's going to end up being a very good, defensive combo guard, but he might really just not be ready to get 12-15 minutes a game this year.
Mason has shown that he plays pretty well without Manu, and Parker will probably log near 40 minutes a game in the postseason. So I don't think games will be lost because of George Hill not being on the court. I actually like seeing him on the court WITH Tony, so I'd like to see more of that next year.
I totally agree that Pop and staff are far better qualified for making an assessment on Hill than any of us generic posters. They see them everyday and it's extremely unlikely that we're seeing something that they're not. That said, I don't think Pop is above having some of his decisions criticized, especially regarding backup PGs. It's also very possible that he could be overthinking this decision a bit also. Especially, when there was evidence to suggest that the decision to give Hill minutes early on, was a productive one.
At times, Pop has a stubborn tendency to overvalue and favor the skills of declining veteran versus that of a young, unknown, commodity, like Hill. Let's not forget, this is the same coaching staff that actually believed Nick Van Exel and Damon Stoudarmire were suitable options at backup PG in 2006 and 2008, respectively. That tendency always has me worried. Again, Pop is not unique in that philosophy. It's the norm among veteran coaches.
The organization took the time and opportunity to scout and draft this rookie guard because there was an obvious need for a player of his skills - at both ends of the floor. With my limited perspective, it appears as though the need is still there.
Last edited by SenorSpur; 04-14-2009 at 09:33 PM.
+1
Now I want to sneak into a practice and see what their reasoning truly is.
See Beno Udrich and Luis Scola.
With all the talk of Jacque Vaughn on this board its like you guys think hes going to be our 6th man. Pop has benched Hill and will use RMJ as the backup point in the playoffs. Vaughn will only be playing spot minutes.
I love Hill and I think he will be a huge help for the team in the long run, but I 100% agree with Pop about not throwing a rookie swing guard into the playoff lineup and telling him to be our backup point. In college Hill was a 2 guard, and so far this year has shown the most proimse playig alongside Tony at the 2 spot. Over the summer and during training camps we will get him comfortable running the point, but you cannot expect him to do it instantly.
Chalmers is more of a pure point right now, but he isnt exactly playing great basketball in miami. Imo, and apparently the SA FO's oppinion, Hill has more upside. Its a of alot easier to teach a young talent how to run the point then it is to get a young talent to buy into playing defense first. And its damn near impossible to teach the athleticisim and wing-span that hill brings on the defensive end.
Expect Hill to develop and grow in our system, and try not to get so hot and bothered because he isnt playing 25 minutes a game his rookie season.
This is so infuriating. Hill and Bowen are two guys who need to be on the floor, yet Pop refuses to play them.
1. Mason at backup point is idiotic. It negates his biggest strength, which is spot-up shooting.
2. Hill has proven that he is capable of making game-changing plays. But I guess Pop would rather be 100% predictable rather than 99%.
3. Udoka in an NBA game is idiotic when Bowen is on your bench.
Question: He still thinks the Spurs are a defensive team, right? We're obviously not an offensive team - we struggle to score 90 points without Manu.
Yet he still keeps Hill and Bowen, our two best perimeter defenders, glued to the pine.
I'll be ecstatic when this moron is no longer our coach.
i like how lots of the haters seem to pretend that Hill hasnt played at all or done anything during the season...
heres the truth:hes the 2nd best POINT GUARD on our team, someone who can provide much needed defense on our opponents' quick young point guards, he can run the point just fine, he can shoot, he can penetrate and create, THERE IS NO ING REASON ON GOD GREEN EARTH WHY HE SHOULD NOT GET THE BACKUP PG ROLE.
all you tools saying 'oh hes just not ready, oh..he hasnt earned any minutes, ohh...pop' are ing idiots.
if he gets benched for the playoffs whilst JV gets roasted by Roy/Paul/Kidd even while playing backup PG, then we deserve to lose.
Then play Hill at the 2 guard with Mason- instead of Udoka.
i understand he may not play well in the playoffs but we can sure use him to stop some of the better guards. He is way better defender than parker, vaughn finley. ect
Hill showed and proved when he got the minutes. It looks more like Pop just being conservative. I could kind of get that ordinarily, but right now the team has nothing to lose. Without Ginobili, they gotta take some chances. At the least, you're getting him some experience so he's not popping his cherry next playoffs when the team is playing for a le.
I've thought about this for awhile because it didn't seem to make much sense but I think I have an idea. George Hill is a bad match for these Spurs, he's better off on a different team.
George Hill will never get much playing time on the current Spurs without getting ALOT better at shooting.
GHill's shooting 40% and 33% from 3pt land...and this is pretty much un-covered spot-up shooting.
When GHill's on the floor, teams leave him open to go guard another guy. And if you add Oberto/Ime/Bowen with him, you have very little offense on the floor except for the Tim/Tony and they get doubled/tripled with no punishment.
And there's one other problem that stops his being used just as a defensive stopper ala Bruce Bowen. Bowen's a physical specimen that fits in the SG/SF mold and his lateral quickness gives him the ability to defend PG's as well. GHill is just an average sized Point Guard.
Because GHill's only a skinny 6'2, he can't easily switch on screen/rolls. Roger Mason is a worse defender but he can switch onto PG's, SG's and even a SF once in awhile. The only kind of player GHill can lockdown defend is a PG whereas a real defensive stopper like Bowen can lockdown 3 positions and probably do a passable job on a Power Forward.
Last edited by Allanon; 04-14-2009 at 04:46 PM.
Amen........I don't know why people get all excited over a late draft pick? People act like this guy was a top three draft and should be starting and making the all star team. even in the beginning some fools were talking about trading Tony because "This kidd is so good"..
The kidd is a small SG who plays great defense and has great heart. I give him that but he is not a PG.....and don't look at when he plays against a crappy team trying to win the lottery."Kings".....Look at him when we are playing against decent teams that know how to play a little defense.
I have watched him all year long and what I see is him having alot of problems running our offense. He has not shown good court vision and does not have the ability to create shots for other players and his dribble ability is not great. Also the reason he hasn't played is that Pop has figured out that you need to have more points to beat a team and Hills offense has sucked so far.
We have tried making a tweener into a a PG and we all know what happened to Daniels.......What is the differnce between Daniels and him?...............
that sucks... hopefully vaughn will be gone next year and Hill will figure out his role for sure
Not the best example to support your point.
My thoughts exactly. We're down to 1 2/3 of the Big 3, so what better time to blood the kid in the playoffs? He was dynamic when given the chance, and I have no idea why they took it away from him.
Sorry to see Pop do this. I guess Pop just doesn't think we'll get very far in the playoffs because we could use Hill's athleticism against some teams over Vaughn's do nothing style of old geezer play! Oh well, it is hard to argue against a coach who has led us to 4 NBA Championships and 10 straight years of 50 wins or better.
if pop can't find mins for our 2nd best peremiter defender and arguably most athletic guard then thats his fault.
This is the most plausible explanation, aside from Benophobia.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
