Hawks considering trading Josh Smith

[ohmwrecker]

fixing the three with smith great what able the point guard it would be worse then the three now

Good God, man. Do you paint houses for a living?

[tim_duncan_fan]

If either of the offers mentioned in this thread were on the table the Spurs would be crazy not to take it.

Our SF would be ing huge for a Spurs 3. When's the last time this team had a legit small forward? Bowen was 2-guard sized and Udoka sucked balls.

On top of getting a very skilled, 6'8 small forward (power forward if you must), we also get either a vet point-guard or a young'n whom we could team with George Hill.

Now Bibby has been around long enough for him to be a known en y, but what about this Teague guy?

Well Jeff Teague had a 24 point 15 assist game this year against Cleveland. I know that doesn't prove much, but these kinds of games don't happen with people who can't ball. And he hit about 84% of his free throws and it's not as if we don't need a boost in that department.

I say if you can get Josh Smith and a young point to team with G. Hill for the future then you do that .

Just my 2 cents.

[024]

parker and smith are two different players so it's hard compare. however, parker is slightly better than smith. while smith has the obvious flash, parker has just as much as an impact during the game. parker creates, breaks down defenses, and is unstoppable when he has his jump shot going. his defense is there when he is healthy and motivated. an all star point guard, 3x nba champion, and finals mvp is hard to match. smith is good, might be better than parker in a few years, but not as good as parker currently.

[Bruno]

Can I get some of what you're smoking? I can find some justification in the statement that Tony Parker is better than Josh Smith, but I can easily argue that Smith is just as good at the moment, if not better.

Of course, you can since we don't value Parker the same way.

For you, I'm a Parker homer.
For me, You're a Parker hater.

[Blackjack]

Parker's a Top-5 player at one of the most important positions in basketball.

Smith's a Top-10 to 15 (?) player at his position and is probably more suited to being your third best player on a championship-caliber team.

Parker clearly > than Smith.

The only thing that gives this any credence are the team's standing in the league and their options for improving upon it.

[tim_duncan_fan]

Parker certainly has the better resume in comparison to Smith, but lets be honest, Tim Duncan deserves a lot of credit for those accomplishments made by Parker. Smith's defensive stats are impressive, but they are certainly not empty, Smith is a very good defender. Parker is underrated, but George Hill is the increasingly better defensive player. And this trade makes a lot of sense because a back court of Parker and Joe Johnson sounds scary enough to be very good and Josh Smith is locked up long term and is still very young, younger than almost all of the current free agents and better than a good amount of them.

This.

Trades make sense for both teams.

[Duncan2177]

Parker certainly has the better resume in comparison to Smith, but lets be honest, Tim Duncan deserves a lot of credit for those accomplishments made by Parker. Smith's defensive stats are impressive, but they are certainly not empty, Smith is a very good defender. Parker is underrated, but George Hill is the increasingly better defensive player. And this trade makes a lot of sense because a back court of Parker and Joe Johnson sounds scary enough to be very good and Josh Smith is locked up long term and is still very young, younger than almost all of the current free agents and better than a good amount of them.

[picnroll]

At the expense of being labeled a Parker hater the Parker of last season was a middle of the road PG at best. Granted he had a series of injuries but that disturbs me more than one injury. He was breaking down every week from something different. I hope he hasn't aged prematurely. When Parker's speed goes to even above average not great he will not be an impact player.

[tim_duncan_fan]

At the expense of being labeled a Parker hater the Parker of last season was a middle of the road PG at best. Granted he had a series of injuries but that disturbs me more than one injury. He was breaking down every week from something different. I hope he hasn't aged prematurely. When Parker's speed goes to even above average not great he will not be an impact player.

I agree.

My concern is that he wasn't very fast last year. He could still get in the lane but it definitely wasn't the same. It's not like he can shoot or pass or defend; if he gets any slower he'll be useless.

He's gone next year anyway. We have a chance to do more on-the-fly reloading/rebuilding while Tim and Manu are still functional and TP is gonna go free agent on us soon, so why not take advantage if the opportunity is there?

Josh Smith and Jeff Teague would be exciting new pieces with huge potential.


@Phila: We're on the same page but G. Hill is NOT a point guard.

His passing game is worse than Tony's, but hopefully it will improve so that he can be a point guard.

[SpursTillTheEnd]

Parker certainly has the better resume in comparison to Smith, but lets be honest, Tim Duncan deserves a lot of credit for those accomplishments made by Parker. Smith's defensive stats are impressive, but they are certainly not empty, Smith is a very good defender. Parker is underrated, but George Hill is the increasingly better defensive player. And this trade makes a lot of sense because a back court of Parker and Joe Johnson sounds scary enough to be very good and Josh Smith is locked up long term and is still very young, younger than almost all of the current free agents and better than a good amount of them.

this perfectly said this is what i was trying to say but i didnt feel like typing that much props phila

[024]

Parker certainly has the better resume in comparison to Smith, but lets be honest, Tim Duncan deserves a lot of credit for those accomplishments made by Parker. Smith's defensive stats are impressive, but they are certainly not empty, Smith is a very good defender. Parker is underrated, but George Hill is the increasingly better defensive player. And this trade makes a lot of sense because a back court of Parker and Joe Johnson sounds scary enough to be very good and Josh Smith is locked up long term and is still very young, younger than almost all of the current free agents and better than a good amount of them.

if the spurs' goal is to spend duncan's last two years competing for a championship, then trading for smith and integrating a new second option is not the right choice. smith is not a primary option and doesn't have the scoring capabilities yet to take over games. smith's skills have not caught up with his athleticism yet so his scoring consists a lot on hustle points.

with duncan and ginobili aging, parker has taken the primary scoring role and has the skill and confidence to execute that role. replacing parker with smith would only be a step backwards for the spurs. duncan and ginobili can be up and down because of their age and fatigue. parker will have to provide the consistency in scoring and shot creating, which is something smith cannot do. when duncan is suffering from fatigue and ginobili is having one of those massive turnover/brickfest nights, it's nice to have parker handling the ball and scoring rather than relying on josh smith to create.

[DAF86]

Good luck giving Smith the ball to try create something on offense like we do with Parker.

[SpursTillTheEnd]

hill's 3 point shot > parker's 3 point shot
hill's d > parker's d
hill can get to the rim as much as parker so why do yall keep saying hill cant run this team at pg, i guess yall forgot how when tony was out hill was the pg and was ballin

[Bruno]

You're thinking too much like a fan and not enough like a GM on the trades.

Is it a joke?
Every time I look at some virtual trade, I look at the financial side like a GM would do. Saying that I'm thinking more as a fan and you're thinking more as a GM is based on nothing.

Let's say, I'm Spurs GM. I have an amazing player with Parker and there is no way I would trade him for a lesser player like Josh Smith. Parker will get a bgi contract/extension but he is worth it.

And for the record I really like Tony, but the Spurs are not winning anything if they don't shake things up. George Hill is really good, but the way things work means that he won't bring any value in a trade. Trading Tony Parker is the only way the Spurs can shake things up.

Oh, I get it.
My bad, you were right. You're thinking like a GM, the only problem is that this GM is Isiah Thomas.
We won't win the championship, let's do some random trades that makes no sense.

Is Josh Smith the answer to the Spurs problems? Maybe, maybe not. But George Hill is ready to step into the starting line up as a point guard, he isn't better than Tony, but the gap isn't nearly as big as most of you insist it is.

Well, I fully disagree with you on that. The gap between Parker and Hill is huge.

I believe that if the Spurs were offered Bibby and Smith for Parker then the Spurs would do it. Bibby is the key to the trade, he would be a very solid player off the bench and play a very good role. Josh Smith is getting better and understanding what he can and cannot do every year, and he's only 24.

Well, that's your opinion. I've mine and it's that Parker for Bibby+Smith would suck for Spurs.

[tim_duncan_fan]

The way I see it, George Hill won't get better at running a team if he isn't given the chance. I think 82 games (and 8 months learning under Manu) is about enough to learn how to become a better play maker. George Hill has all of the tools to become a good point guard, but tools get rusty and forgotten if they go unused. People keep saying that George is not a "true point guard" but based off what? He was a second year player, playing behind the best back court combo of all time. He played the point a little bit as a rookie, but Pop's trust issues with rookies in the playoffs kept Hill benched. Last season Hill played part time point part time off-guard. If they moved Hill to the point 90% of his playing time and learned under Pop then he would get better.

I just think he looked a little shaky just bringing the ball up.

In the limited amount of time he had running the 1, he looked uncomfortable.

Hill would get the ball, dribble up to the 3 point line and then pass it to Manu. The first thing he's gonna have to learn is assertion.

I hope you're right about him being able to become a point though. That would be huge for us.

[DAF86]

hill's 3 point shot > parker's 3 point shot
hill's d > parker's d
hill can get to the rim as much as parker so why do yall keep saying hill cant run this team at pg, i guess yall forgot how when tony was out hill was the pg and was ballin

Did you figure that out when Hill performed that awesome defensive job on Nash in the second round of the playoffs?

[Muser]

If you can do Parker + Dice for Smith/Bibby you do that.

[tim_duncan_fan]

If you can do Parker + Dice for Smith/Bibby you do that.

Anybody in their right minds would do this. You get a borderline all-star that can play a big 3 or a small 4 and a B-level point guard to offset the loss from the 1.

It's a great trade that works for both teams if the Hawks are really interested in getting rid of Josh Smith.

I know TP is a better guard than Josh Smith is a forward but...


LENGTH WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS!

[Brazil]

At the expense of being labeled a Parker hater the Parker of last season was a middle of the road PG at best. Granted he had a series of injuries but that disturbs me more than one injury. He was breaking down every week from something different. I hope he hasn't aged prematurely. When Parker's speed goes to even above average not great he will not be an impact player.

At the expense of being labeled a parker homer even with a so so season due to injuries, TP has been our most consistent player during the PO on Offense and guess what Defense too. On top of that healthwise untill last year he has a pedigree of being a rock, he never missed a PO game in 9 seasons (who can say the same), he healed of a broken hand in 1 month.
With Parker you also have a PO performer clutch as .

so yes parker >>> JS

You're thinking too much like a fan and not enough like a GM on the trades.

If there is one guy not thinking like a fan on the trades it is Bruno. IMO Bruno is thinking too much like a GM and/or a CFO.

And for the record I really like Tony, but the Spurs are not winning anything if they don't shake things up. George Hill is really good, but the way things work means that he won't bring any value in a trade.

George is really good but he isn't a PG he is a SG. Guy averaged something like 0,3 assist per game. I'm not saying he hasn't the potential / talent to become a very good PG but not next year and next year is our last chance. So unless you have a very very very good trade for TP with a very good PG coming with, you keep him.

hill's 3 point shot > parker's 3 point shot

yes no debate

hill's d > parker's d

this one is funny. Hill has a very bad resume at defending elite PGs see Nash Steve. TP Defense is decent at best during RS no doubt but in POs TP D has always been from above decent to very good at times.

[ChumpDumper]

hill's 3 point shot > parker's 3 point shot
hill's d > parker's d
hill can get to the rim as much as parker so why do yall keep saying hill cant run this team at pg, i guess yall forgot how when tony was out hill was the pg and was ballin

He was playing shooting guard.

[Brazil]

BTW I'm quite surprised to haven't seen yet an argument like "lets trade TP for (insert here whatever FA even he doesn't fit or he is overrated or not even close to TP talent... what matters is trading) and let's sign Iverson for cheap to subs ute TP".

[ElNono]

Hill's D is way superior than Bogans or RMJ (who isn't?), but Tony definitely has the better footwork and understanding of team D than Hill at this point. And Hill flat out cannot run a team right now either. Especially the difference of running a pick and roll between TP and GH is night and day. I wish Pop would stop ing around about that, make Hill the backup SG behind Gino, and we could get a relatively solid and experienced backup PG behind TP, and stop with the whole playing out of position BS.

[HarlemHeat37]

Do people actually believe Hill played "PG" when Tony was out?..

Manu's usage % was around 28 or so(IIRC) when Parker was out, meaning he was the highest usage eater on the team by a wide margin..he was the PG for this entire stretch, Hill isn't ready for that..

When Parker is in the lineup, his usage % is around 25, while Manu's is slightly less IIRC..it's a good balance, and clearly it has worked..people like to bash Parker's skills as a PG, but he actually does do a good job, especially compared to Hill..

[Blackjack]

If Hill is nothing more than a backup 2-guard in the Spurs' eyes, they need to deal him for a comparable talent in a bigger body or who plays a different position. Period.

[ducks]

how many games has he tried to learn before the 82 games he will have next year