Who would you cut after this game? - Clippers game edition

[DPG21920]

I agree. While Hill is not a "true PG" and he is not ultra creative, he does more than adequate when called upon over the course of the season when it matters.

[Ditty]

I love how cj been playing lately but theres really no need of him on the team this year because he is a pure point guard who really can't run the offense

temple can run the point guard which he isn't great tbh but has the size to play the 2 also which I think should get more of his minutes at..I haven't given up on temple I think it's more injury and rust because dude was a beast last year

[MaNu4Tres]

Because he sucks and I would rather have a player like Gee fill the void.

I agree with this.


Simmons has been pretty damn bad and Harlem has been the one guy ( that I can think off the top of my head) that explained how bad of a player he is nowadays.

I still can't believe there was a point in time where he earned a 6 year 57 million dollar contract.

The way I see it, either Anderson or Gee steps up tremendously this season or R.C needs to make a trade for a multidimensional 5th wing of quality. If neither of those happen, Spurs will be fishing again in early May.

[Nathan89]

/thread

Everybody stop posting already the thread has ended.

[HarlemHeat37]

I don't have a problem with Hill playing PG off the bench either..

There aren't many teams that have a "reliable" PG as their 3rd guard, in regards to playmaking..

If Manu is injured and Hill has to play more of a playmaking role, then ya, but if Manu is injured, there are obviously bigger concerns..

The backcourt doesn't concern me at all from an offensive standpoint(Parker/Ginobili/Hill is about as good as you can find), and I'm feeling confident about the frontcourt too(assuming Bonner doesn't play too much, and Splitter at least lives up to some of the hype)..the main flaw with this team is the SF position, and perimeter defense in general..that's my only concern, other then injuries..

[DPG21920]

I don't have a problem with Hill playing PG off the bench either..

There aren't many teams that have a "reliable" PG as their 3rd guard, in regards to playmaking..

If Manu is injured and Hill has to play more of a playmaking role, then ya, but if Manu is injured, there are obviously bigger concerns..

The backcourt doesn't concern me at all from an offensive standpoint(Parker/Ginobili/Hill is about as good as you can find), and I'm feeling confident about the frontcourt too(assuming Bonner doesn't play too much, and Splitter at least lives up to some of the hype)..the main flaw with this team is the SF position, and perimeter defense in general..that's my only concern, other then injuries..

Exactly my sentiments. Spurs desperately need perimeter defense and 3 pt shooting from the wings.

[DPG21920]

I agree with this.


Simmons has been pretty damn bad and Harlem has been the one guy ( that I can think off the top of my head) that explained how bad of a player he is nowadays.

I still can't believe there was a point in time where he earned a 6 year 57 million dollar contract.

The way I see it, either Anderson or Gee steps up tremendously this season or R.C needs to make a trade for a multidimensional 5th wing of quality. If neither of those happen, Spurs will be fishing again in early May.

I have said for a while, that as things stand, the only solution I see is a trade. I don't see any other way around it.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

Anderson can be our 3 point guy for sure. I shoot lights out with him on 2k11, which solidifies it.

[ShoogarBear]

Hill should see split minutes at both the point ( 13-18 mpg) and at the SG spot (13-18 mpg).



I don't understand how some people strictly only see him at the SG spot. He has only been the best back up point guard the Spurs have ever had. After all the years people cried and ed about Carter, Hart, Beno, Vaughn, Stoudamire; people are now saying Hill can't play PG?

This Spurs offense and team doesn't need a prototypical point guard like Jason Kidd to run the show. That being said, Hill has done as good of a job as you can ask at the back up point guard position (Including the games he started at the SG spot).

Hill is a good player, and is not a liability handling the ball, but has never shown that he can use his skills to get other players shots or otherwise involved in the offense. He's in no way selfish, but his court vision makes Parker look like the second coming of Magic.

If you want to talk about doing the job of a point guard on offense, from your list Beno, Stoudamire and Vaughn were better at it than Hill.

Vaughn's problem was that he couldn't shoot for squat, and so the defense could sag off him with impunity. But he still knew how to run an offense.

Mighty Mouse was actually doing a very good job at point until Pop, in one of his "bench Bowen and let Kobe get loose" moments, insisted he stop passing and start jacking up shots from everywhere.

Beno was easily the best backup point guard the Spurs have had, but of course we all know Beno's problems were all between the ears.

, Brent Barry was a better point guard than Hill. And if Speedy's half a season counts, him too.

Having said all that, finding a better point guard than Hill is definitely NOT a priority need for the Spurs.

[DesignatedT]

I do keep forgetting about Anderson. Hopefully this guy can take it over if Gee isn't the guy Pop is looking for.

[ElNono]

I don't understand how some people strictly only see him at the SG spot. He has only been the best back up point guard the Spurs have ever had. After all the years people cried and ed about Carter, Hart, Beno, Vaughn, Stoudamire; people are now saying Hill can't play PG?

I'd just like players to play their natural positions. Ultimately, when both Manu and Hill are out there, 90% of the time Manu is actually playing PG, instead of SG, which is his comfort zone.
I don't disagree with you that Hill has been the best backup PG compared to the laundry list above, that doesn't mean he feels comfortable running the Spurs offense.

This Spurs offense and team doesn't need a prototypical point guard like Jason Kidd to run the show. That being said, Hill has done as good of a job as you can ask at the back up point guard position (Including the games he started at the SG spot).

I don't think we need a top of the line backup PG either. That doesn't mean that Hill wouldn't be more productive playing SG (what he played all his life), instead of PG.

[ElNono]

The way I see it, either Anderson or Gee steps up tremendously this season or R.C needs to make a trade for a multidimensional 5th wing of quality. If neither of those happen, Spurs will be fishing again in early May.

Who's available? lol, i kid...

[MaNu4Tres]

Hill is a good player, and is not a liability handling the ball, but has never shown that he can use his skills to get other players shots or otherwise involved in the offense. He's in no way selfish, but his court vision makes Parker look like the second coming of Magic.

If you want to talk about doing the job of a point guard on offense, from your list Beno, Stoudamire and Vaughn were better at it than Hill.

Vaughn's problem was that he couldn't shoot for squat, and so the defense could sag off him with impunity. But he still knew how to run an offense.

Mighty Mouse was actually doing a very good job at point until Pop, in one of his "bench Bowen and let Kobe get loose" moments, insisted he stop passing and start jacking up shots from everywhere.

Beno was easily the best backup point guard the Spurs have had, but of course we all know Beno's problems were all between the ears.

, Brent Barry was a better point guard than Hill. And if Speedy's half a season counts, him too.

Having said all that, finding a better point guard than Hill is definitely NOT a priority need for the Spurs.

Spurs have yet to need a " true (Jason Kidd-like)" back-up point guard since Manu and Tony have joined the team.

Spurs have had the luxury of having 3 very efficient ball-dominant creators/scorers for the past 8-9 years; where the back up point guards duties would be to mainly spot up on the perimeter ( while Tim has the ball in the post; while Manu/Parker has the ball in P&R's) and to also defend the opposing point guards (or whoever they match up better with --In Barry's case during the 05'-06' deep playoff runs).

That being said let me rephrase, Hill has been the most productive and most talented back up point guard the Spurs have ever had.

[DrSteffo]

Gist seems to be out to me.

[SenorSpur]

Hill is a good player, and is not a liability handling the ball, but has never shown that he can use his skills to get other players shots or otherwise involved in the offense. He's in no way selfish, but his court vision makes Parker look like the second coming of Magic.

Having said all that, finding a better point guard than Hill is definitely NOT a priority need for the Spurs.

That's the key point, right there. Hill is passable as a backup PG, but he simply does nothing to create offense for anyone other than himself. It's not his fault, he's been a natural SG for most of his life. It's pretty said that Blair is already a better passer than Hill.

[ShoogarBear]

Spurs have yet to need a " true (Jason Kidd-like)" back-up point guard since Manu and Tony have joined the team.

During Beno's best games, I would disagree. There was actually serious basketball discussion about the merits of trading Tony and making Beno the starter (and real talk, not the usual Tony-hating).

That being said let me rephrase, Hill has been the most productive and most talented back up point guard the Spurs have ever had.

I can probably agree with that statement.

However, just because the Spurs don't require much out of a backup point guard doesn't mean that Hill actually is a point guard.

[SenorSpur]

I like seeing players play their natural positions.

[Solid D]

Bonner.

So, truthfully, I'd have to say Gee or Cousin are about to be jettisoned.

Of the list in the poll, Neal and Jerrells are the most secure. Jerrells has done nothing but show Pop he can play pressure D, shoot when open, make shots when open, and bring lots of energy...enough to earn the 3rd PG slot.

[MaNu4Tres]

From a friend of mine,

"I love Hill, he's going to be a real player, but he's not a real necessity when it comes to size and skill-set. He's just a quality player, one it'd suck to lose, but not someone who couldn't be replaced or upgrade with a different but better fit."

*Referring to the possibility of Hill being traded for a better fit, if say Parker has another 08-09 season.*

I agree with him. Hill is a damn good player, but if Spurs could get a better fit at the 2/3 spot in a trade for him, I might just have to reluctantly pull the trigger. Manu has proved to have the ability to run the show when it matters (April-June; when Parker is resting) anyways.

[FilSpursFan]

Definitely its not Jerrels..

[TJastal]

Gist is a lost cause..he's a fan favorite, I like him too, but he's never going to find a niche in the NBA..he's stuck in a tough spot..he doesn't have the tools to play the 3, and he still hasn't figured out how to use his athleticism advantage against 4s..

Neal and Simmons haven't impressed me at all..I've been saying Simmons was done for months, he hasn't proven me wrong..they are both shooters though, and we know how much Pop and his system needs shooters, so I would be very surprised if they are both cut..Simmons is Bogans, with a slightly better 3-point shot and significantly worse on defense..

Temple is tough..he has looked absolutely horrible, but you also have to consider how he played during meaningful games last year..I was never high on him, but he definitely should get some credit for how he played last year..

CJ looks like he's finally getting it together..I would have him ahead of Temple at this point..

Gee is my favorite of the bunch, but he has barely gotten any PT during preseason..is it due to injury?..is he going to get cut without having a chance?..does he already have a spot?..tough to say..he's by far the closest thing the Spurs have to a potential wing defender though..

Letting Hairston go doesn't seem like such a great idea anymore.

[TJastal]

From a friend of mine,

"I love Hill, he's going to be a real player, but he's not a real necessity when it comes to size and skill-set. He's just a quality player, one it'd suck to lose, but not someone who couldn't be replaced or upgrade with a different but better fit."

*Referring to the possibility of Hill being traded for a better fit, if say Parker has another 08-09 season.*

I agree with him. Hill is a damn good player, but if Spurs could get a better fit at the 2/3 spot in a trade for him, I might just have to reluctantly pull the trigger. Manu has proved to have the ability to run the show when it matters (April-June; when Parker is resting) anyways.

I disagree. Hill is a special player with room to improve even more. Without his playoff heroics the spurs would have been kicked out in the 1st round by the mavs, again. Frankly, as a spurstalk member I'm thankful for this. We'd would've never heard the end of it.

[Chomag]

Is Pop allready trying to play his mind games with Gee? Break him down to build him up I guess?

I don't get it.