Reply With Quote
No
Trade Hill
Keep Hill
If the spurs end up resigning Tony Parker this year, do you think that the spurs should trade George Hill? Are you for a trade yes/no and why/why not. If you are for the trade of hill what position would you want to upgrade.
I think we should trade him if we resign Parker. I would want to trade him because I am not a fan of playing tony and hill at the same time. Teams that play a small pg and sg just do not win. Just playing hill at the pg will not allow him very many minutes and that would just be a waste of talent. By trading him we can then upgrade talent of other positions. Also temple seems to have the potential to be a solid back-up pg.
No
The Lakers just won a championship playing three midget guards and Kobe Bryant at the guard positions.
I would re-sign parker. When Tim Duncan and Manu retire in 2-3 years, the Spurs will be in a position to make a decision:
Keep a team of Parker/Hill/Anderson (hopefully)/Blair/Splitter/whoever else, and try and add a key free agent or two to make a new run at the le
or
Trade off assets. I think you have to do one or the other. That team isnt nearly a contender as it stands, but wouldnt be a top lottery team either. At that point, if Tony wanted to go, I'd trade him and whoever else for picks and prospects. Use the cap space to facilitate trades and pick up picks. And just start over.
Frankly, I'm not sure which option I'd choose. I think the above team with a key free agent (lol, Durant? In our dreams) could contend depending on what other teams look like by then.
Kobe played 41 minutes per game in every round of the playoffs besides the first round. In the regular season he played 38min per game. Manu played 28min(reg.season)33min(first round)38min(sec.rd). Manu cant handle any more than 33 min. per game. This will force us to play to much of tony and hill.
who do you think the Spurs would get for Hill?
I am not sure who I would get but it would either be a sf or a big.
Reasons to get rid of g.hill if parker resigns:
1. Team that play a small pg and sg do not win.(mavericks)
2. We have temple to play backup pg.
3. If anderson is as good as I am hoping then I want him to get all the backup sg minutes. If we do give anderson all the backup sg minutes then g.hill will be a waste of talent on the bench.
4. If we did it this year we could upgrade the sf. Next off season I would get a nice you big.
I am shocked that only me and one other person find it beneficial to trade g.hill if the spurs resign parker.
We have to keep him, because when Duncan and Manu will be gone, TP will most likely want out, and Splitter, Blair and Hill will be our main core with maybe one of the other youngsters.
Tony will be resigned for around 5-6 years, so by the time Duncan and Manu are gone he will have 3 years left which is very tradeable if he keeps his actual level of play. And he can nail us a couple of younger players to complete our rebuilding process and some picks for sure.
I think RJ last year will also come into play the same way, helping us acquire picks and younger players.
Hill, Blair and Splitter will already be under new contracts, but most likely cheap ones given that they will be restricted free agents, and with whatever we can get for Tony and RJ we can very much be set within 2 years after TD and Manu retire.
what makes you think that Hill and Parker will play much together?
I'd rather have Tony come off the bench than Temple.
..or is Manu too short to start at the 2 guard for you?
I just want the spurs to do everything we can to win a ring with timmy. I do not want to wait. I think you settling for mediocrity.
I think you want to trade Hill for mediocrity
This thread is strange. Why in the would the Spurs ever trade Hill? Pop and the FO love this guy. He is a prototypical Spur, for christ sakes no one even knew about this guy before SA drafted him. We've had him on our radar for quite sometime and I would go as far to say that he is one of the more untouchable guys on our roster.
If hill and Parker do not play much together then hill is a waste of talent. If we do play them a lot then were playing small and that does not win. The only team we can play hill and tony against is the mavericks. Against all the other playoff team hill and parker together is a terrible line up. That is why we should trade him if we resign parker. I do not know why you would want the spurs best player coming off the bench. Of course manu is appropriate sg size.
No I want to trade hill for a player that is of equal talent but a different position. A position that will make the spurs much better than have hill. I would prefer to never see tony and hill on the court at the same time. In the playoff tony can play 36 minutes per game. That would leave only 12 minute for g.hill. That not nearly enough for a talent like g.hill so pop is forced to play hill and parker at the same time. I think the team would be much better if temple would take that 12 minutes. Anderson will then get all the backup sg minutes. I think that anderson and parker is a better lineup than hill and parker.
Seriously in the near future either Parker or Hill has to go. One or the other will suffer and not be maximized if they play in the same team. It has been Ok for the past 2 years due to Hill still developing and Parker's injury, but at some point something has to give. We are better of trading one of them to fill in need such as a quality SF or athletic combo forward
Sorry, but we keep Hill no matter what even though we have Tony. Our gap at backup SF is too big, and 3-guard lineups with Manu/Tony/George are very effective for us. In this Spurs offense, all you need your SF to do is hit the corner 3 and play excellent defense, anything extra is just icing on the cupcake. Hill is capable of great defense and hits those corner 3s at a great rate.
Fair enough for wanting someone equally talented for another position, however, it seems like many Spurs fans tend to overrate him badly. He's not going to bring someone good enough to start in a trade, he's not that talented, neither is his trade value that good, being a 6'2 SG.
I think you first wait and see how team chemistry works with a healthy TP. The Spurs went on a nice run when TP went down. The Spurs starting unit played well with Manu. However it was quite obvious that TP didnt have the same effect playing with the bench guys. He got his 20pts buy was never able to get anyone else in a groove like Manu did when he came off the bench with the likes of blair and bogans. Their is no excuse for Bonners play in the playoffs period. If the the chemistry is good then you resign TP and see if you can get something good for hill. If Chemistry aint right and a healthy TP still isnt gelling with the other guys similiar to last year then he is the one you trade.
We're gonna keep Hill no matter what
And i don't think Parker is going to stay in SA. Next season will be the last as a Spurs player.
eh. basically the same.6 Parker-Hill-Jefferson-McDyess-Duncan 69.0 1.10 0.81 +33 7 3 70.0%
7 Parker-Ginobili-Jefferson-McDyess-Duncan 63.6 1.21 1.00 +35 15 7 68.1%
http://www.82games.com/0910/0910SAS2.HTM
Unless there is some great offer on the table, and you have provided none, there is no good reason to trade Hill.
no!
Two words: Rookie contract.
This whole concept is just ass backwards. Why is it always an either/or thing with you people? Parker and Hill can both play on the same team and play well together. Really, they can . . . I promise.
Parker is gone
GONE !
Parker to the Suns for Turkoglu..final offer.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
