Reply With Quote
Manu Ginobili or Malik Hairston?
Who's better? Tim Duncan or Dejuan Blair?
Manu Ginobili or Malik Hairston?
blair >>> duncan
hairston >>>>>>>>> gino
I have all the respect in the world for tony. it just seems he stalls out the offense at times. tony's committed to the french national team in the off season so without any rest how effective is he gonna be? he played for them last summer and look how this year went for him. if tony is gonna burn himself out, why not trade him?
Parker is way better and every Spurs fan who has been watching the games the last 5-10 years knows it.
One concern about Parker for me is that his blazing speed was his main weapon and made his game effective. If age/injuries/fatigue take that speed away from him, he might be a pretty average player.
Parker's better hands down. Hill could be a better player when it's all said and done, but he's extremely raw as of now.
Parker is significantly better. He's unstoppable offensively and works well enough defensively. Teams have to plan their defense around how to stop Parker.
It's really saying something about Hill that we can ask this question and have some argument about it though. Hill is capable of putting 20+ on the board playing within the offense and still offering great defense. Teams haven't started planning for him yet but he also has more time to develop. I see Hill retiring with one or more rings.
TP>>>>>>> Hill
The only thing Hill has on Tony is 3 pt shooting and that he can dunk.
Tony for one has confidence and swagger that George Hill lacks against contenders. People here like to talk about Hill's defense, but Parker's is actually better. Hill has constantly been owned by so many point guards this year. Parker is a much better leader. Hill seems too shy right now to lead the Spurs.
You're just being your usual self.
So just look at Tony's number when he had Georges age.
Makes it 05/06 season 18.9 on 54.9% FG to go along with 5.8apg.
Yeah yeah fkn stupid man.
wow wtf... people are getting bored here!
Seriously, do you even remember what we saw from Parker by his second year? In his first year, he had two game winners, including the shot that won us the division le. His second year, he made huge shots and game winners (ot game in Dallas when Dirk and Bradley slammed into eachother) and he showed the ability to just take over a game and win it himself, at that young age. He had 29pts in the clincher over the 3 time defending champion Lakers and he was always a better passer!
Hill is solid but he's far from Parker.
ur stupid...
ur comparing what ? a 2nd year ghill to a 05/06 tp who has what a couple of years nba experience under his belt...
nba years experience is better then what age you come into the league...cause ur already got a few seasons under ur belt and adapt to the nba lvl, as compared to a 22yr-24yr old rookie coming out of college first/2nd year in the nba stats still on the learning curve. There is only a few exceptions to this like lebron, d12 who just came out dominated...
why dont you compare by nba years experience? 2nd year GHILL3 to 2nd year parker?
i see so you didnt remember the series he disappeared against the fakers...fck the fakers
hill is better at everything except scoring, passing, mental thoughness, playmaking.
hill isn't a top 10 PG in the league (yet).
Parker vs Hill?
Seriously?
He dissapeared against the Lakers in 04 after dominating the first two games, I agree with that. In 03 however, he was GREAT in the series against the Lakers and for all the crap we give him for how he SUCKED in the 03 finals, he was actually incredibly good in 4 out of the 6 games. George Hill hasn't shown the ability to take over a game yet...he can score but its not the same dominant offense that Parker brings. And he hasn't really played enough playoff ball yet to judge him as better than Parker at the same point.
Selective memory strikes again.
Man you said we can't compare an NBA sop re and an all star in his prime and you're about right.
But the thing is that "the prime" is about physical attributes. Yeah having that many years of experience at such a young age for a player like Parker is a of an advantage when you want to compare players.
That doesn't change the fact that the fair way to compare player is at the same age and not when they get the same experience.
Instant fail.
People bash Tony all the time because he doesn't pass enough, and yet they want Hill, a guy who can't throw an assist to the best PF of all time, to replace him.
This is hilarious.
This thread shouldn't have even been started. Is there any argument in George Hill's favor at all? Tony is superior to Hill in every way except 3-point shooting and (maybe) rebounding. Hill's defense is one of his strongest traits, but an argument can be made that he's not even better than Tony at that.
While it is interesting to compare the strengths/weaknesses of the 2, would it be more realistic to study how they can complement each other in order to make any noise in the remaining RS & the POs? Also hope Parker gets healthy ASAP.
Hill does have great potentials given it's only his second year. What the ceiling is remains to be seen.
I would never make an argument that TP is better than Hill on defense. and BTW... Hill can play above the rim.. Not that it matters much but it is another thing to add besides being better at 3 pt shooting. When was the last time TP threw down an Oop?
this season: Hill > TP
last season: TP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hill
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
