Reply With Quote
Good to see Hollinger understand what many of us have been trying to explain for a while (in regards of why Hill is expendable and why he should be traded).
Doesn't read like a money move tbh.
Good to see Hollinger understand what many of us have been trying to explain for a while (in regards of why Hill is expendable and why he should be traded).
Thanks for posting Vic.
With all these rookies needing a year to get over themselves, we might be down to a 5 man team next season
joshdaboss embracing his role as GNSF
Most of the CATZ on here dont even know how to play basketball...much less the business side of it all....SMH....
Hollinger focuses on the money side. I'd say that's actually secondary. Kawhi may impact the team on the court more than GHill did, and Hill did well. The money situation is bonus.
disagree. the ONLY way this trade makes some sense is if you focus on money #1. Also this article assumes Hill is just a typical NBA player that would just walk away for more money. Hill is not like that.
because he already has made his share?
what is his share? especially under new CBA?
spurs winning the draft stakes....
we only win if it delivers a championship, not going into the next round to get beatened again
dunno what stats to expect from him, maybe something prime malik rose was avg here...
Uh, the point isn't that they wouldn't have been able to give Hill MLE, it's that they don't think he's worth it.
We traded a guy who wasn't even a lock to beat out guys like Anderson and Neal next year for three players who have tremendous potential.
Yeah, it was only about the money...
And LOL at the thought of hill not being late that. How do you know? Watch him get MLE or better money out of Indy next year, barring drastic changes to the cap.
not sure if serious....
of course Hollinger thinks they are a winner. He loves the Spurs. But truth is, in terms of competing seriously for next year, they took a step or two back.
I see this as a very good way to part with George. He's a great player and the fact is, he won't get the playing time he deserves here in SA. In Indiana, he has the potential to really blossom. Good luck George!
Hill is going to deserve more than next years salary which is 1.4 million.
He is not going to sign for similar money after his rookie contract is up.
GH is versatile, has demonstrated to be a good defensive player, good citizen etc.
However, he is undersized for a 2 and has never become a good 1.
In addition he did not exactly flourish in this years playoff 40% FG, <30 from 3
He will have a long NBA career and will have good or great games causing an excessive number of posts on this board.
I'll miss him, but I think it was a good move. No Risk no reward.
Two excellent prospects Leonard and the Latvian. + save some money.
Hill is versatile and has shown to b
Hill never got into an consistent agressive mode like Pop urged him to do. At times he seemed passive on the court.
Watching limited film of Leonard, it appears he is very agressive on defense and has athleticism, skills that the team has been needing.
I would have liked him to be an inch or so taller--but according to DX he has such a freakish wing span he may play taller. I'm not completely sold on the wingspan as subs ute for height theory, but let's pretend it works since he's our guy.
DX said he was their #1 wing, even with his lack of offensive polish, so maybe, just maybe he will fill the defensive void at the wing since Bruce left. Anything will be better than RJ in defense and rebounds.
This is the primary reason they traded Hill imo.
what? what has Anderson proven that makes you even suggest that? Neal is a great shooter, Hill is way better at every other aspect. Neal will soon be 28, he won't be getting any better besides shooting. Again, I think it's a good move if we are rebuilding. I guess we are.
agreeYeah, it was only about the money...
YOU get a life over-the-top aggressive bonner and rj hater you
George Hill was not the key to "competing seriously for next year," assuming we can in the first place. We're not weak or shallow in the back court, we ARE shallow at 3-5.
EDIT: we aren't shallow at 3 with RJ, Green, Butler and now Leonard, but RJ definitely skews our price/performance ratio at 3 towards the negative.
Last edited by admiralsnackbar; 06-24-2011 at 11:07 AM.
It's kind of funny that some people here think we would have been a contender if we would have kept Hill. How far did we make it in the POs the last seasons? Do you think Duncan and Manu will improve next season? We needed some size and D skills at SF and some young talent for the future (and a big so the rights to Lorbek is not a bad bonus). Great draft! Props to the FO.
Charles Barkley said on Dan Patrick show, Spurs made good move in trade of Hill for Leonard
Barkley's a smart guy.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
