Reply With Quote
The Spurs are screwed if you're relying on those two to play PG.
I know I expect Hill or hopefully not Mason to back up Tony but what about beyond that? Please don't tell me they're gonna keep Vaughn. I hope it's Hariston or McClinton.
The Spurs are screwed if you're relying on those two to play PG.
not for the length of time they'd have to do it besides Manu is capable for a few minutes.
What about it? Parker, Hill, and then Gino if needed. Think about the size advantage of having Gino, Mason, RJ, Duncan and McDyess if Parker was out for any reason.
Gino is more than capable of spelling at the PG position if needed.
Hariston is NOT a pg lol.
Parker and Hill would probably be enough to play all 48 mins @ Pg since both of them are very young. Manu or McClinton could be the 3rd option for pg if nesscary.
Exactly. We only have 16 minutes per game at most for a backup PG, Hill and Manu can handle those with ease. McClinton may be Austin-bound, if he makes the roster he may get a few mins, but he is more of a 2 guard playing D on the PG is my understanding.
mcclinton if necessary but i think hill is ready now.
Why exactly do the Spurs need a third PG? There's no necessity in having one.
W
Ginobili is very effective running the point. If Parker is out for a few games, like last season, Hill, Ginobili, and Mason will be able to hold down the fort until he comes back.
Of course, there's always Blake Ahearn...
Hill can't really play the PG position.
Hill is still learning, but he'll definitely be a serviceable backup. It's hard for him to look great when he's playing next to Tony, but he showed flashes last year (and when I say flashes, I mean like week-long flashes) of being able to run the team. He's just gonna keep getting better
With a healthy Spurs team, this isn't really an issue. Parker and Hill can handle all the PG minutes easily.
A problem arises, however, if Parker gets injured at some point. Even if he's only out 5-10 games, who do you use with Hill? Are you comfortable with the minutes being split between Hill, Manu, Mason, and possibly McClinton? (If the answer is yes, this becomes a non-issue again.)
Agreed.
Hill running the back up point will only morph him from a decent back up, into a legit back up point guard, a la Anthony Carter, who is always in attack mode offensively and defensively, whether passing or scoring.
If Hill can perform the way he did while Parker was out (including a memorable Bulls game where he outplayed Derrick Rose), yes.
Let's see how George looks in the SL..
It'll help to have Manu and Jefferson as ball-handlers too though, since George is very good at doing the "role player" things, like crashing the boards and getting after loose balls..his quickness and length is very key..
McClinton is not a point guard. The Spurs don't really have two point guards on the roster. If Pop just trusts Hill and throws him in there and lets him make mistakes then they'll be fine, but we all know Pop's not likely to do that.
1) What if either Parker or Hill get hurt? We need a 3rd pg on the roster at least for injuries or fouling out.
2) Hill is still unproven as a pg...assuming that hill was not just pulled by Pop out of spite. We have to come to terms with the possibility that Hill may not adjust to the position...in which case, we need a reliable backup.
Two words - Alex Garcia.
I don't really know how he'll measure up, but I'm pulling for him. He's worked to get another shot, and the Spurs FO really liked him last time.
If Marcus Williams sticks around, he can play a little point forward as well. But I'm comfortable with Parker and Hill, with Manu bringing the ball up in a pinch.
Can anyone answer me this?
Whats this obsession with the point guard label on a player?
A point guard is a player who creates for others with his ball-handling ability. Correct?
So what does that make Manu when he has the ball on all pick and roll opportunities when he comes off the bench?
What does that make LeBron in Cleveland when hes setting up Mo Williams and Delonte West in the corners for 3?
What does that make Kobe Bryant in Los Angelos?
My point being is it gets annoying hearing how "Spurs need a TRUE back up pg. Hill isn't the answer. "
Spurs have 3 players that can create off the dribble now Tony, Manu, RJ.
Spurs just need George Hill to play gritty defense and bring the ball up the court to set up the offense for Manu/ RJ/ Tim to create shots for others. And then when warranted, hit the open shot or create off the dribble after one of the big 4 creates initially.
I guess everyone has forgotten the beginning of last year when Hill started a bunch of games and did WAY better than anyone had any reason to expect.
I agree. I'd be really surprised if Pop went into the season without adding another PG to the roster. If Hill steps up and solidifies the role then that player might get cut somewhere along the road, but I just can't see Pop starting the year without some extra insurance at the PG position.
I believe in George Hill.
As do I, but Pop's track record about carrying 3 pg is pretty well established.
Even if Hill isn't able to handle the PG duties, I think he'll still get minutes. He brings too many other things to the table to be left on the bench. It's just a question over whether or not Hill can get his minutes at PG, thus freeing up SG minutes for other players, or if Hill needs to be a SG thus giving Pop a dilemma over what to do at point. Either way, Hill is going to be a big part of the Spurs second unit.
Last edited by coyotes_geek; 07-08-2009 at 10:39 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
