Reply With Quote
Only if we traded Parker in the process...no point in having 2 starting PG's on the team.
Poll.
Only if we traded Parker in the process...no point in having 2 starting PG's on the team.
Nope.
Probably not straight up. I think Hill has a lot of upside.
morey isnt stupid
no way
lol
include battier and we call it a deal
Sure. If you give us Dejuan Blair.
The answer wasn't clear enough the first time?
Still no.
I don't think any Spurs fan will say YES.
I say no. Hill is a better defender than Brooks is.
we already been through this..............................
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthre...l+aaron+brooks
Aaron Brooks is a better player than George Hill. I don't think anyone can dispute this. With that said, neither team would do this trade.
Yes
In a heart beat if we did not have Toney.
Deal. Then we can ship Parker off and get a decent big. So Parker is replaced by Brooks. We get a great defender with Battier. As much as I like Blair, the real impact on losing him is marginal. And we presumably get a true big to play with Timmy.
They both fit on their respective teams. I don't think Brooks would work out well here, and I don't think George would work out well in Houston.
Hill complements the Spurs' backcourt much better than Brooks would.
brooks is a great 3 point shooter, but no.
Both are coming into their own. Brooks is faster, a better 3 pt shooter, and has started at PG for a season. I don't think Houston would do the deal.
Then what would we do with two very good starting PGs? You'd have to trade one to pick up something we need (SF?) plus a backup PG to replace Hill. Since Tony has a bigger rep than Brooks he'd be the trade bait. I don't think SA would do the deal either.
And what big do we presumably get for Parker?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
